Basically, just getting the ball rolling... and making sure my instructions about viewing these comments in the context of the blog were correct.
Steve
Just in case no one notices (I know some readers don't check the post above before they comment), here is a link to the previous "open thread" here at TrueCrimeWeblog.com:
"Open Thread: A Photo of Madeleine McCann?"
Steve
Thanks Steve - I can't say how much I value this 'place' to discuss this case. Thanks for creating the open threads ... and I promise never to call what I am doing 'blogging'.
Thank you, John.
There's a reason I've forgotten to mention in the past that people shouldn't refer to commenting here or on any other weblog as "blogging" -- once you've made your comment, you have no further control over the post. You can't go back and edit, you can't delete. If the blog goes poof (as CrimeBlog.US nearly did, long story, won't go further off-topic discussing it here), then as far you know, your comments are gone forever. Blogging -- even if a blog seems to disappear, most of the time the blogger at least has access to the raw html of the entries. I can go back and add to, edit, enhance whatever I post. Commentators can't do that. That's why I'm rather adamant about noting the difference between leaving a comment on a blog post and being the blogger. The blogger has full editorial control over all the content, including your comment, most of the time.
Here's the catch-22, though: in the U.S., you are legally responsible for what you post in a blog comment, not me. Kinda sucks if you think about it.
When I started blogging back in 2000 or so, there was no need to insist that people be aware of these differences. Then in 2005 or so the mainstream media really started to notice blogs, and they promptly proceeded to screw up the nomenclature. To talking heads on the news channels, ANY message posted to ANY online forum of ANY kind is "blogging" and that's just thick-headed stupid on their parts. I always feel like I'm being incredibly persnickety when I insist that people understand this stuff, and I'm truly not a very persnickety person. But like I said, there is a demonstrable difference, and really, the commentator is at a disadvantage. That's why I want people to be clear about what they're doing, and why whenever I write "get your own blog" I'm really not being sarcastic (well, I have been a couple of times, but not recently). I figure if a person feels like they have enough to say that they follow comments, post constantly and in detail, they may deserve a more permanent, visible platform.
Anyway -- sorry to go on when this is not about that silly note I often make. I appreciated your comment, John, and just wanted to explain my reasons for pointing out what is and is not blogging with a little more detail than usual.
End OT for me 
Here's the catch-22, though: in the U.S., you are legally responsible for what you post in a blog comment, not me.
I did not know that and am found it really suprising!
P.S......that was the nicest "dear John" letter I've ever read Steve lol
Well, it's a pretty recent development, about the responsibility for comments. I think it arose out of a lawsuit in Texas. But to my knowledge, that's the deal -- a blog or message board owner is not held responsible for the content of users/readers commentary -- the person behind the commentary is responsible. Some newspapers with online articles that are written in a blog-like format even include a note to this effect above the comment form.
Again, sorry for the OT -- back to your McCann discussion!
Edited By Siteowner
I'm confused - do we have two threads now? One at the haloscan url and one here?
I just posted a question at the other thread, will put it here to:
Why are only Britons asked to provide DNA/fingerprint samples? How can PJ know the unidentified samples they found are from Britons? Surely there must have been other nationalities at the resort and around the area at the time?
In a word, Martina, NO. I put the haloscan link up for reference only. Consider this -- if you continued to use that thread, eventually only people who saw these comments might know about it. I severed the link from the previous entry to the earlier thread so people would congregate here and use this one instead. I just wanted people to be able to refer to older comments if they needed to. The discussion should continue here.
Martina - I assumed that only Brits stayed at the Ocean Club.
Have you seen the letter from the Leicester police?
http://sic.sapo.pt/NR/
rdonlyre..........mento1.jpg
Sorry try this:
http://sic.sapo.pt/NR/rdonlyres/.../
documento1.jpg
The Correio da Manhă reports that if the McCanns are accused they would be judge in their own country due to the rule of non-extradition of national citizens by the British.
Do you have some information concerning this?
Ok, Steve, thanks!
Thanks also John, I had a look at the letter. Is it real?
The interesting thing about this Leicestershire police letter is that anyone who fills out the form and provides fingerprints and cellphone info, becomes a "party" to the investigation, and therefore is bound to secrecy.
Is this just a good way of shutting everybody up?
(Also presumably those who refuse to comply could theoretically be made arguidos...)
[John, "snoffy" seems to be a word I have invented ---- an abbreviated mixture of snotty-nosed and toffee-nosed.]
Hi Martina
Glad to see you're back.
I am so confused about this Open Thread. Where are all the posts from yesterday with JohnUK and DC ???
Is this a new thread?
Another reason why I don't believe the all children in one app theorie:
Some witness allegedly said only the McCanns apartment was visited by the Tapas9.
So if someone saw this (must have watched the McCann app for close to 2 hours) they also should have seen all the 'guest' children being brought back to their own appartments after 10pm? But nobody did see that?
Hello everybody.
It is nice to be together again.
Thanks Steve
Never mind my prior question. I found the old thread. I am all caught up now
Hi Karina,
I found the thread from yesterday only today! Needlessly suffering for one additional day ... *sniff*
Yes, this is the thread now. Not the other one anymore, but you can still get to it here
http://tinyurl.com/37kdrr
(Does it work?)
In another forum someone put up a real nasty scenario ... She asked, if all the children were together that night, why did three men of the Tapas9 visited them during the dinner, and why was one child sick, and one (Maddie) died. What happened there ... ?? (I think you know where these thoughts lead to, I don't want to type them.)
I'm sure the PJ must be thinking about such possibilities too?
And if all the children were in the one apartment, why would the Tapas grandmother stay behind in the restaurant once Kate came back screaming? In my opinion, this is another illogical theory.
This was published today in the 24h portuguese newspaper:
"Maddie and the brothers, Sean and Amelie, were sedated in the apartment where they were, in the Beach of the Light, with others four children, in the night of the disappearance of the girl, the 3 of May. This certainty of Pol
Ăcia Judiciária (PJ) is based on the first preliminary results (done in September) of the laboratory of Birmingham. Conclusions that are in accordance with the forensic analyses previously made in Portugal, in the National Institute of Medical jurisprudence. According to source of the PJ, do not exist tests of the others four children, children of the friends of the McCann, that proove that they also were under the tranquilizantes substance effect. Such was not analyzed in the tests collected in the house of the Beach of the Light. In this scene, and crossing information with the inspectores who interrogated McCanns and friends, the investigators had arrived at a possible conclusion that the brothers of Maddie would be to sleep - as well as, hipoteticaly, the other children of the couple's friends - when something succeeded the Madeleine McCann.
Martina - I've seen the nasty scenario - to be honest I think its ridiculous (ludicrous) but I'm sure the PJ have thought of this.
This was published in the portuguese newspaper 24horas:
Maddie and the brothers, Sean and Amelie, were sedated in the apartment, in the PDL, with other four children, in the night of the disappearance of the girl, the 3 of May. This certainty of Pol
Ăcia Judiciária (PJ) is based on the first preliminary results (arrived in September) of the laboratory of Birmingham. Conclusions that are in accordance with the forensic analyses previously efectuadas in Portugal,in the Instituto de Medecina Legal.
According to source of the PJ, tests do not exist of the other four children, that proove they also were sedated. Such was not analyzed in the tests collected in the house of PDL. Given this, and crossing information with the inspectores who interrogated McCanns and friends, the investigators had arrived at a possible conclusion that the brothers of Maddie would be to sleep - as well as, hipoteticaly, the others children of the friends of the couple - when something succeeded the Madeleine McCann.
Before yesterday, the spokesman of the McCann, Clarence Mitchell, denied to the 24horas the presence of seven children in the apartment of the Ocean Club. Yesterday, he did not care to answer the phone.
This new version of the events contradicts the thesis defended by the group of friends concerning what really happened the fat
Ădic 3 of May and weakens the thesis of the McCann, who believe that their daughter would have been abducted. The investigators believe that the child could have been victim of an eventual domestic accident."
Sorry I had to split in various posts.
Regarding all the children being in the McCanns' apartment, Martina made a good point.
How come nobody saw these parents take their children back to their respective apartment?
Or was it Obrien who took the kids back before 10pm when Kate found Madeleine missing?
And nobody saw him?
K.
Perhaps they had acess to the appartments by inside and when they were checking they came from outside?
This is getting really bizarre. Seven kids together, unsupervised? And sedated? Sound like a horror movie.
This artcle in Diario de Noticias is also interesting, namely because it is stated that the appartment was sealed from 4th May to the first week of June and that after the dogs sniffed death it was not rented anymore.
http://dn.sapo.pt/2007/10/10/
soc...rante_5_ho.html
Sorry, that should have read "Sounds like a horror movie".
We have so often heard and read about how events unfolded around 10pm on that night. If taking the children back to their appartments would have been part of what happened I'm sure we would have read about it by now.
Never was it mentioned anywhere that the children were present when police arrived either.
If they were taken back before 10pm the same person who stated that all parents were only visitng the McCann app should have seen this too.
I think it's another false assumption - either by the media or by the PJ.
Or a red herring as someone here suggested earlier.
Well, papers yesterday did say that there is possibility they were all together. Well, I don't believe they were.
http://tinyurl.com/266xa9
The McCanns deny that their children were ever sedated and are threatening a law suit.
K.
How do we know that the parents took the children back to their apartments once the alarm was raised? The PJ did not arrive for some time after. I assume that the Paynes were not involved in putting their children into the McCanns apartment as they had a listening device and didn't leave the tables to 'check'. I feel that the letters being sent to those who attended the Ocean Club during that week in April/May is a process of elimination. A process to uncover the real perp. I wonder if they will all cooperate and does it include all the Tapas 9 as well? I still think there is some holding back (naturally) from both police forces.
Hi everyone
My question is this
Are the family who were using a baby monitor to listen in to their children included in this? It sounds somewhat unbelievable
The article in Correio da Manha is very interesting but very long. If you are interested please transalate with Altavista.
http://www.correiodamanha.pt/not...idCanal=181&
p=0
All this speculation about the children being in one room and NOT A WORD from the Tapa friends.
It would be so easy to deny. Why aren't they talking?
Telegraph is now saying
"The police investigation into Madeleine McCann
’s disappearance is refocusing on the theory that she was abducted from her bed by a paedophile."
http://tinyurl.com/2ezqgl
From the same article:
It emerged that Portuguese police have launched the country
’s biggest ever anti-paedophile operation, raiding 75 properties where child pornography has been downloaded.
The operation, codenamed Predator, will analyse 150 computers seized from 80 suspects.
While the raids are not being officially linked to the Madeleine inquiry, they indicate the focus of the investigation has shifted away accusations that her parents, Kate and Gerry, may have harmed the four-year-old and back to a search for a potential abductor.
Karina, good question. Maybe the McCann legal team is asking them not to?
Yes, I believe it is a process of elimination and a way to get the Tapas 7 to cooperate without have to make them suspects if they are asking for everyone to provide DNA plus clothes. Regarding clothes, how would others in the complex remember what clothes they were wearing (I wouldn't expect if I were one of Tapas). Also Nan the Tapas grandmother did go see what was going on, then she had to go back to the bar to get her purse and camera. Now the camera, (hope she took pictures of supper) hopefully proves what everyone was wearing, or maybe someone at another table might have some footage or picture.
Ohhh don't you just love it when the media back pedal. Ahh the poor wee Telegraph. One day it's sedation, not looking good for the parents, the threat of a law suit follows and the next is an article on a putative claim that the PJ are looking for a paedophile. Ludicrous.
That is an excellent point Dee regarding Mrs Payne's mother. She did have a camera and you wouldn't bring one unless you took photos. Would they be time stamped?
Time Stamped - very interesting!
Regarding the raid, I would guess this was the accumulation of several months work. It also can show the PJ was keeping an open mind and looking at all avenues.
Re Dee "I would guess this was the accumulation of several months work."
14 months according to the Correio da Manhă.
http://www.correiomanha.pt/notic...1155&
idCanal=10
Takes care of that then, but congrats to the PJ and I hope they nail them. Thanks Jose
Maybe the swing is relevant after all.
If they were swinging would they not want all the children in the same house so they would not be disturbed by them????
And it would be a reason to sedate them too.
I made a mistake in my last post. I misread the dates: the 14 months were refeering to a similar operation oin July 2005.
The swing would also be a secret binding them together and a secret they would want to keep out of the press.
Dee, where did you get the info that they want clothes? I did not read hat anywhere, only DNA and fingerprints.
Clothes??? For what? To look for ... clues? (Oh dear!)
I hope you are wrong, Dee.
Grannie's camera, good point. But I guess the PJ must have long taken those photos?
If Granny made pics, and if they had a date stamp, and if the PJ saw them, then maybe they KNOW that one or more of them are lying about their presence/absence and that's why they are so convinced that something is being covered up.
Things that have always puzzled me are:
Why did they lie to family and friends saying the windows and shutters had been broken and forced??
Why all the support to the McCanns comes from GM family and not from Kate?
Why did not her mother rush to be with KM in PDL or when they returned to UK?
It seems her mother in an interview in british TV answered when asked if the McCanns were well something like "I suppose so" or "i believe they are" which implies she did not see them.???
I think that is strange.
There are rumors the PJ has a call between KM and her mother saying "It was an accident mom... if you go on i will hang up the phone...."
Would this explain her mother's attitude???
So many questions, so few answers
I believe it must have been from a portg. paper someone on another board translated (perhaps wrong). I checked through a lot of various eng. papers & I can't find any mention of clothes, so I (very embarrassedly) will retract the word clothes!
Marilia:
I also heard that there was tension between their families. To be honest her mum and dad always came across as dignified and genuinely concerned. Whilst his family were self publicising, aggressive and critical.
Where did you hear this rumour about the phone call?
Dee I saw it too but i think it was in an english newspaper
I will try to find it
here it is
the turists were asked about details on clothing
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle2625572.ece
I heard the rumor in another forum, annorak
I agree her parents come across dignified and concerned. Nothing to do with GM's sister and brother etc.
Actually I did find some references to tourist & clothing, but not that they are asked to turn in the clothes they wore that night.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle2625572.ece
"The tourists are also being asked about the use of their mobile phones and for details of their movements and clothing the evening that Madeleine disappeared." A couple other papers quoted this stating from the Times.
Maybe I am just getting confused.
Hi All,
Steve's really done us proud with this new set up, many thanks Steve. I've always found this a very pleasant forum to discuss this difficult case on and I missed it when it was being updated.
Catching up on all the comments, I'm gobsmacked by the Leics. Police official letter (I noticed there were no ref.no.s on it and other details I would normally expect to see -these things being omitted is unusual in an official Police letter, I know because I deal with them quite a bit in my work) how did it find it's way onto here? But I am pleased (if it's genuine) that they are taking DNA samples of all those present (very belatedly IMO!)they should have doen this from the start even if for elimination purposes only.
I liked the point about the camera and what pictures the 'close friends' may have that may be useful to the enquiry, once again surprised if these haven't been requested already.
The questions we have never had answers to remain as they are... we still don't know. To quote G. Dubya 'We don't even know what we don't know' I won't elaborate into the known unknowns as i think you get my point.
I still think that there's a cold offensive against the T7 (9 minus G & K)to pressure them into splitting and talking.
Who knows where this is going next?
Lizbee
"It seems her mother in an interview in british TV answered when asked if the McCanns were well something like "I suppose so" or "i believe they are" which implies she did not see them.???"
I don't think it neccessarily implies that. English people talk like that especially in public.
What do the English here think?
Interesting discussion. But where did the rumour concerning the mobile phone call come from (the K said to her mother it was an accident?)
Martina,
British people (especailly the upper working & middle classes) can be quite literal and high thinking when describing emotional issues. Therefore if (as we know) Ks Mother had not seen or spoken to her VERY recently but also knew her daughter was facing highly emotional swings (as one would in such a scenario)she would truthfully be able to answer the question with a Yes or No. There's nothing strange in her answer for me given what we know of the family. It would be stranger if that member of the family usually gave detailed analogies of feelings but did not in this instance.
My opinion only as usual.
Lizbee
I missed the word 'not'out:
should read:
...she would not truthfully be able to answer the question with a Yes or No.
Sorry,
Lizbee
Thanks for the new link M
Dee - it is getting confusing!
1) Kate and Gerry McCann affirm never to have given sedative to the Madeleine and to its two twins brothers, Sean and Amelie, opposing declarations made in September for Brian Healy, grandfather of Maddie, that admitted public that the grandsons took Colpol Night (an anti-inflammatory one for children, that induces sleep)...
(...)
2) In an emitted official notice this Wednesday, the McCann couple devaluates the last notice on the case, classifying them as "speculation" and attacking the Portuguese press. In the document sent to the media, Kate and Gerry inform that its lawyers will go "to monitorize" the covering given in England to these notice and that "they will not hesitate in acting in the competent instances if necessary".
(...)
3)In an emitted official notice this Wednesday, the McCann couple devaluates the last notice on the case, classifying them as "speculation" and attacking the Portuguese press. In the document sent to the media, Kate and Gerry inform that its lawyers will go "to monitorize" the covering given in England to these notice and that "they will not hesitate in acting in the competent instances if necessary".
The parents of Maddie so say "to be despropositadas as offensive" the notice - propagated this Wednesday for the 24Horas and the Post office of the Morning - that they give account of that the results of toxicology made by the Laboratory of Birmingham disclose that Madeleine McCann would have ingested drugs to sleep in the night of its disappearance, the 3 of May.
www.sol.pt
Where is "Controller" Mitchel?
It was not him that evaluate all comments and speak loud and clear for the couple Me and Mrs McCann?
http://tinyurl.com/29s7el
I was reading the results of this computer animated video which retraces the time line and it says that someone was leaving the Tapa table every 5 minutes.
It says 7 persons went out 14 times in a period of 2 hrs.
I can't remember where I read it, but it seems to me that one witness had said that only one person (Obrien) was gone from the table.
Do the results of this video study make sense to anyone?
Karina
Do they make sense, Karina, again good question.
We heard first that the waiters said noone left the table.
From an earlier timeline it was widely assumed that Gerry, Jane, Russel and Matthew only left the table, 4 not 7 of the 9.
And that earlier timeline also did not look as if people were leaving every 5 minutes.
I don't know what exactly this criminal psychologist who did the 3D animation took into account, but it sure doesn't make much sense to me.
http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecas...s-kate-
may.html
Saturday, 8 September 2007
MADELEINE'S GRANDFATHER ADMITS KATE “MAY HAVE USED CALPOL”
Brian Healy, the father of Kate McCann, admitted she “may have used Calpol” to help Madeleine to sleep, but said it was “just outrageous to think of anything else." Gerry and Kate strongly denied, on August 16, using any kind of drugs on their children to stop them waking up at night. Calpol is a common painkiller that is used, in UK, to to calm them down or help children to sleep.
I looked up Calpol although it is a painkiller it has sedative properties. So once again a spin to me there is not much if any difference? The question should have been (in the famous ear-pulling, bad body language video we all hotly discussed), do you ever give your kids something to put them to sleep without them being sick or in pain or something to that effect?
timesonline says
Paulo Rebelo, one of Portugal
’s most senior detectives, said that “all lines of inquiry remained open” even though police were concentrating on the involvement of Madeleine’s parents.
in an official announcement.
But then also
They are certain that Madeleine died in the apartment but the question they cannot answer is who took the body and where it went.
in the same article
http://tinyurl.com/2w88cj
I have really enjoyed being on this thread in particular for some of the more zany inputs. I had just about got my head round alien abduction, I was trying hard to understand astrology without the outer planets and even raised an eyebrow to a body being pickled in wine for 25 days. But cmon you guys SWINGERS!?!?!? As a man I found it remarkable that K had found 1 member of my gender prepared to put his body in harms way, but 4 and all at the same table! It could not happen.
Please could we get back to reality does one use a claret or a burgundy for pickling or does it depend on whether Mars is aligned with the moon and the Venusians are not abducting in Portugal.
In spite of all these new articles, we are back to square one.
1. possible accidental death
2. trying to cover it up with the help of the Tapas7
3. no idea what happened to Madeleine's body.
I am still sticking to the abduction story but with some reservations.
Stanley - perhaps the swingers were all pickled at the time.
Martina (+) I think the article on the 3d projection quotes the sources for the timeline - which was from several sources including the one published in the Times. The waiters contradicted this of course. I don't see what computer graphics adds personally - unless we can expect an Xbox or PS3 game based on the event (Tapas Raider 9?).
I think we have reached a little gently circling backwater in this whole affair. The recent stories have been far from convincing. And the only thing that can be construed from PJ activity are:
1) the new guy wanted to visit the scene to see for himself (fair enough)
2) they are trying to create a watertight case by eliminating all the other Brits (which has probably become worthwhile now that the McCanns have an awesome legal team which will exploit any loop hole.
3) that they are publicising recent activity on pedophile detection to show they are not complacent about this issue - but there is no direct connection with Madeleine.
Also there is no sign of the McCanns actively trying to look for M or help the PJ.
Stanley you are so funny, good thing you don't get around more to other sites (you wouldn't get off the floor laughing)! This is the only relatively sane site; that tries hard to back everything up as rule. If you find or found a more sane one, I would be very interested? Sometimes when I do laugh at the crazy places Maddy is, was, moved, different countries, etc. and I feel guilty. I remember my cousin who is a paramedic and he's told me some of the terrible jokes they make when they have to scoop with spoons a family of the road after an accident; so they stay sane. We all hoping for her return, justice and the truth regardless what they is. But I agree it is getting so out there that; maybe they actually are innocent, which is looking simplier than a great number of the other guesses.
Karina - abduction? ok what are the positive indicators for abduction apart from the McCanns own belief? Are you writing off the cadaver dogs? Most reports seem to indicate a level of certainty that M died in the apartment. So if the parents are not implicated then could it not have been a burglar or other intruder? If this was the case why did they take her body?
http://tinyurl.com/2w88cj
And yet another deceptive title "...police return to kidnap story"
I don't know how they get these titles!!
John,
I did forget about the cadaver dogs.
Ok, they are not reliable and why would they smell only Kate ? Don't you think that if the body had been transported, Gerry is the one who would have carried Madeleine? Yet, the dog did not sniff him.
And the body in the car 25 days later??? Nobody has come up with a good scenario for keeping this body in the Portuguese heat.
Until I can figure out a plausible scenario for the accidental death and disposal of the body, I'll say someone else took her.
John, good post. Want to bet Clarence will try & dominate/confuse the press tomorrow about the big bust? Also your comment, "there is no sign of the McCanns actively trying to look for M or help the PJ", is my biggest cause of suspicion of their innocence! What they say and do has never made sense. What happened to the lie detector test (a paper had mentioned they would/could set it up) and they volunteered to take about 3 weeks ago (although they didn't say they would do it in conjunction with the paper), when public opinion was changing? It's the inconsistencies that we are seeing, that has turned the tide in my opinion.
Karina, say John was carrying her in a blanket, sheet or towel, he wouldn't necessarily have the scent on him, and what if the blanket, sheet or towel was what the dogs smell in the car, would that make sense to you?
Karina - its possible that all the stuff about the DNA is misleading - especially that in the car - and it is taking so long to do the 2nd tests (due this Friday I think). What exactly are they doing in that lab?
But the McCanns themselves have said that Kate was shown videos of the dogs 'going crazy' near the car and on her clothing + cuddlecat. Obviously this is not enough on its own - but if you add all the 'little things' don't you get a big thing - i.e. abduction is so massively contra-indicated that what would make anyone prefer that theory?
If it was a definite abduction wouldn't there be bits of evidence pointing that way? I don't see any - not that we know about.
I hope that all that money that was donated IN GOOD FAITH by the public (originally to help find M) is seized and held in trust until this case has been solved. I'd hate to think the McCanns are dipping into it in order to fund their defence.
I have to agree with Dee on the polygraph test.
I would have volunteered to take one a long time ago. In the US, it's pretty standard procedure to take the polygraph test in order to be eliminated from further investigation.
I wonder if they took one in the privacy of their attorney's office. If they don't pass the test, the results are not publicized.
Dee !!!! hey I've got an alibi ...
"Karina, say John was carrying her in a blanket, sheet or towel"
you will be hearing from my lawyers Messrs. Sue, Grabbit & Run.
John, I'll get my checkbook, but I won't pay for campaign managers or overtime, you got it!
Karina,
PJ never told that they close any theorie. PJ said always that all lines of investigation still opened.
But in face of the results (i think they might have) they said the priority line of investigation is the dead of Madeleine.
Abduction continues to be a valid line of investigation. But like us at work sometimes we have to go from a task to another, after redefiniton of priorities. The redefinition of priorities can be made by yourself, by your boss, by something that happened, and so on.
I think it was very easy to kidnnap Madeleine and run away with her to Spain. Or in to a boat.
You see, in Portugal a missing person, even a child, is not a crime until 48 hours (this will change I think).
Because of that, the police start investigate if the missing person doesnt appears until 48 hours later.
After 48 hours of the missing, even the search started before by police (PSP, GNR it depends of the local), PJ starts investigate 48 hours later.
If they cant get proves that help to find the missing person, the case still opened but PJ take out the means affects to the investigation.
John,
I just feel in my heart that I have to give the Mccanns the benefit of the doubt until another explanation makes sense to me.
Why people despise them to such extent is not something I can understand.
Jeannette
Dee et al,
Please see link to Occram's razor this is the mathematical hypothesis that 'the simplest idea is usually correct',or 'return to your first instincts' http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/bae...eral/
occam.html
My personal first instincts and simple ideas were that the T9 were lying, that there is something amiss.
What do others think?
Lizbee
I have resisted answering back uptil now but "yawn"stanley.
Marilia: that is shocking. If she told her mother that it was an accident then her mother should have told her to come clean. I know my mum would.
Calpol: you know what, why not admit it in the beginning? Why lie? They could always have said well the kids had a bit of sunburn and so we gave them a small dose to lower their temperature...
Good point about the camera, hopefully the police have got copies of the photos.
The video simulation is based on the timeline provided by the tapas 9. It basically proves that if they are telling the truth, then its unlikely that there was an abduction. And if they weren't telling the truth and the checks were less frequent, then we shouldn't believe anything they said! imho.
Carlos,
48hrs is an eternity when a child is missing.
I hope they change your laws. The Amber alert system we have now in the States has been very helpful.
Swingers - I dont believe they are. But if they are, they are. It is their personal lives.
I think is normal that friends make hollidays together even with children. Of course the children become the priority, like i think is normal.
Suspects? - I think they are. Too much "missunderstandings"
Guiltys? - No. At this moment.
Abduction or accidental dead? - I dont know. I know is that the missing of the girl, the difficulty to find a body "alive or dead"... is equal for the two lines of investigation. The transport of the body, the difficulties i think they are similar.
That hours, in a zone of vacantions, full of people... and nobody, nobody saw nothing??????
Not the Tapas 7 or 9, but other people in holidays, hot days, people walking on the streets, people on the beach at that hours... Its not real the situation, i think.
But is very, very real 
unfortunnaly
I think it could be very significant that Rebelo - who had been in charge of the Casa Pia investigation - has been assigned to the Madeleine case.
Since finding out about Ms. Cipriano and the possibility that she made a false confession under duress, I have wondered whether the whole Algarve PJ could be a rotten kettle of fish.
I think we now (especially the Portuguese amongst us) have to ask ourselves: Has the PJ been infiltrated by child abusers/ponography makers?
Has a shortage of "available" children (since the Casa Pia revelations) meant that other children have had to be siezed? Could there be a connection to the missing Spanish boy on the Canary Islands? Were certain PJ officers channelling the blame onto the McCanns in order to divert attention from the possibility of an "abduction to order" implicating a wealthy local child abuser - someone known to the Casa Pia investigators? I do hope Rebelo has some good life insurance.
Oh my God, AndyT, are you SERIOUS?
As for that story that the mccanns will sue, i think that is highly unlikely. Just sabre rattling to try to get the portuguese press to shut up.
Their whole strategy is to avoid court. If they sue then it will definately go to court. If the portuguese police never find madeleines body then this may be the worlds only opportunity to find out what actually happened, under oath! Bring it on! I say to the Mccanns.
lizbee, i agree.
Does anybody know if DNA testing can identify ethnic group? I was wondering about the follow up with Brit tourists in PDL - why only Brits?
AndyT - I'm not being snoffy but take an occam's razor to your theory.
I know Karina...
48 hours in a small country, with open borders, with the see around...
Yes I agree with you.
But i know that a kidnnaper usually is someone that, in face of the danger to be catch, can kill.
I dont know if the Amber alert is better to save lives or to catch the guilty one. The priority is to save lives. Only after some period of results can be studed.
But i think that, for a child, i think, between 12 and 14 years old, the 48 hours could be half, but could be 0 hours for a age inferior to 12 years old.
But this is my opinion. I dont made the laws (i think a lot of laws could be made better).
Andy T, you are making a salad with all theories.
Rebelo is a trustfull agent, i think.
I think that because his team in Lisbon is not a team of "good boys and "incompetents players" or with afraid, because they put an embassador, a doctor, the most important and loved pivot of portuguese television (and the leader of Portugal Interests in Euro 2004), the director of Casa Pia, all them in a court of law.
He is not afraid of anything, I think.
I think in a lot of things they dont have "political experience" or "emotional inteligence" to lead with some stuff, but without courage to do the right thing, i dont believe.
AndyT,
We've all been back together again no time whatsoever and you're bang at the spaced out theories again... Does it have to be something really wierd to retain your interest? I still believe that this is far simpler than we can imagine, something happened, an accident perhaps, people panicked as there were no squeaky clean members there (after all they all knew children/infants were being left alone)and lies were fabricated to cover up their omissions as good citizens and parents. What K & Gs part in this is the next question once you've made headway into those initial lies.
Carlos, maybe my salad has too many cherry tomatoes in it, but the other salad - the one with seven sedated kids all sleeping in the one room, being visited at intervals by depraved male tapas looking for sex, with one child vomiting and another dying - really doesn't taste so good either!! There's just too much lettuce.
Right On Lizbee!
Just want to add although I do not know anything about the PJ, it is conceivable that the Spin Team are doing background checks. I bet no matter which country we discuss and "a seasoned police officer", someone, somewhere has accused that officer of something at some time in their history of service.
Swinging I personally refuse to discuss; I won't bore anyone with my reasonings, except to say it is a non issue.
Lizbee, of course you maybe right.
The PJ said that Ms Cipriano killed her daughter because the latter discovered her having sex with her brother.
This sounds to me like a text for a Brazilian soap opera. Have you ever seen one of those? They really are pretty ridiculous.
Actually, I'm outraged by the Maddie case: the irresponsibility shown by parents, police, media etc. !!!
The Cipriano case seems to be more about police irresponsibility.
Whatever the case, each time the perps get to go free.
John follow-up on your question "I was wondering about the follow up with Brit tourists in PDL - why only Brits?" I and I believe others suggested in so many words it could be a way to get the Tapas to produce, in an innocent way without causing the trauma of suspicion? Putting it another way if they ask everyone and they refuse...that will speak volumes, won't it though!
BTW did you get the check yet, Karina's delivering it for all the homework we do for her.
www.sol.pt
Speaking to the journalists in the Directory of Faro, after a meeting with the district director, Guilhermino Encarnaçăo, and new the responsible one of the Department of Investigaçăo Criminal (DIC) of Portimăo, Pablo Rebelo, the national director of the PJ was disclosed hopeful where the laboratory's results arrive soon.
"Still we are not in the ownership of all the results. We wait to have them proximamente, but they are factors that we do not control in the PJ", affirmed, in reference to the examinations that they are to be made in a laboratory of Birmingham,UK. Answering to a question on the alleged possibility of guilt of the parents, he affirmed that "all the inquiry lines continue and will continue in open until the conclusion of the inquiry".
"Any conclusion that if it takes off would be speculation and us in the PJ we do not want to feed the speculation", said. Recognizing that the inquiry "is not easy", Alípio Ribeiro it reaffirmed that the Policy that is director is pledged "in making it with serenity".
With career in the combat to the drug in the Directory of Lisbon, occupied the functions of associate national director. New the responsible one for the DIC of Portimăo of the PJ made career in the Central board of Directors of Inquiry to the Traffic of drugs(DCITE) and was to the front line of the Directory of Lisbon during the inquiry of pedofilia that resulted in the process now in coourt of law.
---
Everything is opened.
I didnet read any trustfull newspaper saying about all childs sleping together.
Only a tabloide with experience in bombastic news when the notice inside has a different mean of the big letters. A tabloide that sale newspapers always with scandals in the front page.
The couple’s official spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “Contrary to renewed speculation in the Portuguese press, Gerry and Kate McCann wish to make it categorically clear that they have never, ever used sedatives on their children."
If they took a lie detector test on that statement for instance they could pass. Capol is defined as a painkiller, but has sedative properties. So in theory it is a truthful statement, so was Gerry's the twins "don't think Maddy is on a little trip", although they originally told them "she's gone on a little trip." It is the twist on words that could get them a pass on a lie detector, can't see why they don't do it?
I've grown cold on this case, but I'm glad to see that Occam's razor is still a tool of our trade. Ferret out the truth about Madeleine no matter who threatens suit.
Here is the latest entry dated 10/10/07 on the McCanns' website. It's short, so I'll post it:
After a few days of ridiculous newspaper coverage in the UK and Portugal it was heartening to hear of the statement this evening from Mr Ripeiro, the National Director of the Judicial Police in Portugal. He has again emphasised that all lines of the investigation, not only Madeleine
’s death, are open and that much of what has been written is pure speculation and in some cases misinformation. Scientific reports that we drugged our children clearly fall in to the latter category.
In the coming days and weeks we hope that only factual material is reported, allowing everyone to focus on finding Madeleine and who took her."
John -
Take Occam's Razor to the Casa Pia investigation itself. It wasn't simple, it wasn't obvious, it wasn't very likely... but it most definitely was true.
As wacky and wild and far-out as Andy's theories sound now, how crazy did the Casa Pia accusations - against the head of the Socialist Party in Portugal, the Portuguese ambassador to South Africa, a television personality, a lawyer, a doctor, and the director of the homes - sound in 2002?
Occam's Razor is a great tool, no doubt about it. But it's not foolproof, and it's in no way 100% applicable to all situations. Sometimes, every now and then, wild and crazy and far-out things do happen to normal, everyday, ordinary people.
Thank you DC; if you weren't here I would probably leave this discussion.
One thing I have learned in life is that ONE theory (in this case Occam's Razor) is never enough to explain or reveal the complexities of life.
No AndyT you are wrong. There is always at the root of every complex case a simple beginning. To muddy waters bring in complexities in the hope that the simple will be overlooked. Breaking news this morning is quite shocking (as if we wern't shocked before) - it's either at the heart of this case or simply another ploy to muddy the waters.
omg it gets worse: Gerry is not Madeleine's real father':
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
pag..........ge_id=1811
Brazilian soap indeed. But life is stranger than fiction oftentimes
qualifier: the daily mail article is a month old but this is what is being said on portuguese tv and in 24 horas today.
How true it is... who knows. As carlos said 24 horas is not a respected paper but this is definately sue-able if not true so you'd think 24 horas would be careful.
More twists and turns... no wonder so many of us are gripped!
24Horas Today
Gerry is not the Maddie's Father
The PJ already knows that Gerry McCann is not the father of Madeleine, reports the 24horas within sources to the PJ and the (Portuguese) national forensic medicine.
For the investigators, it was very relevant to determine the paternity of the child that was created by artificial insemination. These diligences were done in England, according to our sources.
It was necessary to know if the biological father was involved in the Maddie's disappearance. After investigation in the sperm bank used by the McCanns, the English authorities found the biological father and concluded that he had nothing to do with the disappearance of Madeleine.
The fact that Gerry is not the Madeleine's father is very important. "It explains why the DNA markers of Madeleine are very different from those of her twin siblings"ť, said a source within the police.
In other words, the Maddie's genetic pattern is different from those of Gerry and her siblings, and there is no doubt in the DNA samples analyzed by the laboratory of Birmingham. There is no possibility that this pattern could be confounded with those of her twin siblings.
The tests were used to obtain a genetic profile and the person was determined by "crossing the samples with the genetic data of the twin siblings"ť explained a source from the institute of forensic medicine.
The Analyses done by the British laboratory, a month ago, bring some doubt about the paternity of Maddie. Those doubts were dissipated. The fact that Gerry McCann is not the father of the child is also important to understand his relationship with Kate.
This is a thoroughly modern crime case; IVF, DNA, heat-seeking helicopters, sperm donors, the Findmadeleine internet site, paypal donations, and of course us, cybersleuthing...Who needs CSI ?
Maggie, as far as I can see (GOOGLE), this morning's breaking news is that Rebelo (of the Casa Pia case and now in charge of the Maddie case) has detained 80 suspected Portuguese pedophiles, in connection with current inquiries.
DC and everyone - yes I know Occams Razor is not a theory as such but a kind of working praxis - but I was suggesting that to get to the heart of this case we need to a) identify the known facts (which we established before are very few) and b) build on the fewest number of possible facts to make a coherent description of events. If you are going to introduce a whole new scenario eg. pedophile ring involving police /cover up and so on - then it would be helpful to point to why this is the best theory rather than just introduce it from left field.
Actually we could dump Occam and go for 'blue sky' thinking - develop all possible (including crazy ) theories and then eliminate them one by one and see what we are left with. If nothing else this would help keep Stanley amused.
I value AndyT's comments - but it doesn't mean I agree with them.
The fact (if it is one) that Gerry is not the biological father is not that surprising since we know they used IVF - a sperm donor is obviously a possibility. I'm not sure that this should have been made public as if M is alive then its a piece of sensitive personal/private info.
AndyT - A paedophile(s) may well be involved but what does this say about the DNA found in the tyre well of the boot? Or many other aspects of the case that are important. It could be a diversion tactic while the PJ get on with solving the case.
John, given the latest 'news' regarding the paternity of Madeleine - this is a missing person possibly murder case and well really anything goes - it's only a matter of time anyway before it all comes out in the wash. The latest blog from Gerry already suggests the parents are thinking Madeleine is dead.
Right ... after some thought ...
IF - Gerry is not M's father then she must have unique DNA in that family
IF - the DNA in the car is anything like 80% (or possibly less) of a fit for M then it must be hers because her parents and sibs have different DNA (cannot be explained by nappies and so on)
IF - the type of body fluids found indicate a corpse then either her body or things which have been in contact with her were in that car
in which case all the PJ are doing is developing the scenario - the sedatives in the hair isn't really crucial but just supportive of the idea of an 'accident'.
The ONLY other alternative is AndyT's - that a pedophile ring with links to the police have her or her body and have planted the evidence that went to FSS in Brimingham. Otherwise how could anyone have her DNA to plant?
Three big IFs I suppose.
Jose: The fact that Gerry is not the father does not necessarily mean Maddie and the twins have a different genetic profile. Very often, people revert to the same sperm donor in case of IVF. So in that case the genetic profile would be quite similar (and the traces in the car could then indeed come from the twins).
Occam's razor: what is the simplest theory? IMO, Maddie wandered off when she woke up alone in the appartment and somebody took her. Why would the McCanns have stayed on so long in Portugal and taken the initiative to ask for more tests from the UK? The PJ are also clearly reverting back to this possibility.
Andy T
.......i think your spot on with peadophiles infiltrating the pj, if you research the child abuse in portugal it is RIPE...i even emailed the mccanns the day after maddy went missing and told them to get british help,do not trust the pj!
Sahron - I think it is being suggested that he is the biological father of the twins but not of M.
John - that would of course not be impossible but has this been discussed anywhere? So far, I've only seen suggestions that he is not the biological father of M. How likely is it to be able to father twins through artificial insemination after having had to resort to a donor for your first child? Perhaps not impossible, with science processing and new AI techniques, but it would be interesting to have more evidence on this. The theory of a paedophile ring with links to the police seems a bit far fetched to me. Remember the Dutroux case in Belgium? The was huge speculation at the time that a paedophile ring with contacts to the Belgian government and the royal palace was involved, but it just turned out to be Marc Dutroux and 1 or 2 of his friends.
Sharon this is a quote from Jose's posting of the 24 Horas article:
"The fact that Gerry is not the Madeleine's father is very important. "It explains why the DNA markers of Madeleine are very different from those of her twin siblings"?, said a source within the police.
In other words, the Maddie's genetic pattern is different from those of Gerry and her siblings, and there is no doubt in the DNA samples analyzed by the laboratory of Birmingham. There is no possibility that this pattern could be confounded with those of her twin siblings."
This is why it is thought to be significant.
Does anyone have a link to the article about the paternity?
pinkdrummergirl, i tried to link to your article but it didnt work
Clarence M seems to be strangely silent.
Gerry claims to be the natural father:
http://tinyurl.com/2vx8og
Re ali
Try the following link to the article 'Gerry is not Madeleine's real father' published the 12th september.
http://tinyurl.com/ywc93o
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
pages...in_page_id=1811
try this one...but maybe this has gone the way of the maid story, the 7 kids in one room story etc etc
sorry didnt see jose had posted...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top...89520-19931974/
Clarence Mitchell, spokesman for Mr McCann and his wife Kate, said: "Due to further unwarranted, unsubstantiated and totally inaccurate speculation in the Portuguese press today Gerry and Kate McCann and their lawyers have authorised me to issue the following statement.
"For the record, Gerry is the biological father of his daughter Madeleine. A newspaper report in the 24 Horas newspaper suggesting otherwise is nothing short of lies.
http://www.paternitytestinglabs....adeleines-case/
This is a very interesting article:
First DNA test results on Madeleine’s case (May 24th)
In addition, Madeleine’s genetic profile was ‘assembled’ from her parents’ profiles instead of having taken DNA from her belongings, such as toothbrush or hair.
very interesting site dee, thanks.
It also says: "One of the drawbacks of the otherwise powerful and seemingly infallible DNA profiling resides in its extreme sensitivity. A person
’s DNA sample can very easily be contaminated with another person’s DNA at the contact of a finger. So far, forensic science allows police to obtain a DNA profile from a sample as long as it is not mixed with other person’s DNA, and it is not degraded (DNA breaks down as time passes). Because of these limitations, many cases usually go to a dead end."
But FSS are working on a new computer system to overcome this.
I did think it laughable when the Mccanns were saying her DNA could have come from the twins things but maybe that was in fact possible.
However there has been an editorial declaration in 24horas standing by their story that Gerry is not the father (biological) and that the hair in the boot did have a follicle which could only have come from a corpse.
on the same site it also says that traces of madeleine were found in another car: "In addition, the dogs also found traces of blood in the trunk of another car, allegedly belonging to McCann’s acquaintances."
Forgive me if you all know this, I was travelling in central america in july and august and missed out on this bit of info...
In the same site:
http://tinyurl.com/32baqt
26th of August Findings in Madeleine's case stir controversy.
New findings in Madeleine's case bring unexpected results, this time complicating the McCanns position. A team of police sniffer dogs found suspicious traces of odour in the keys of a rental car that had been used by the McCanns a few weeks after Madeleine vanished.
British news sources commented that Portuguese police thinks this evidence may indicate that the girl's body was relocated using this car. In addition, the dogs also found traces of blood in the trunk of another car, allegedly belonging to McCann's acquaintances. These developments feed newer hypotheses suggesting that the McCanns are somewhat involved in Madeleine feared death. The immediate question these developments raise is whether the new evidence would be subject to DNA testing to confirm that a body was indeed carried in these cars and if so, establish the identity.
I have never seen in any newspaper that traces of blood was found in the car of a McCann's friend. Did you read somewhere?
Andy said
"Since finding out about Ms. Cipriano and the possibility that she made a false confession under duress, I have wondered whether the whole Algarve PJ could be a rotten kettle of fish.
I think we now (especially the Portuguese amongst us) have to ask ourselves: Has the PJ been infiltrated by child abusers/ponography makers?
Has a shortage of "available" children (since the Casa Pia revelations) meant that other children have had to be siezed? Could there be a connection to the missing Spanish boy on the Canary Islands? Were certain PJ officers channelling the blame onto the McCanns in order to divert attention from the possibility of an "abduction to order" implicating a wealthy local child abuser - someone known to the Casa Pia investigators? I do hope Rebelo has some good life insurance."
I was thinking along the same lines. And I was also thinking that Rebelo, if he lives up to his name, might be in danger if he starts digging deeper ...
Someone's translation of the 24 Horas editorial defense:
DECLARATION
I want to declare here: the news making the headlines in today’s cover is really relevant. The fact that it has been proven — according to sources this newspaper has in the PJ and in the Instituto de Medicina Legal [national forenscis intitute] — that Gerry is not Maddie’s biological father explains a big part of the problems that this investigation has been facing, namely that, by doing DNA testing, it found contradictory results. While this fact was not cleared, given the testimonies and the other evidence gathered so far, the police could not, in any way, ever find out what really happened.
I also want to declare here that we considered the possibility that who gave us is this information might in any way be instrumentalizing 24horas to defend its own interests. After we made that consideration, we came to the conclusion that the the main issue — the veracity of the news — was not in any way put in doubt, not least because our journalists checked it with two different, unrelated sources. These are things that we do every day. But today, given the sensitivity of the issue, I want to declare that, as usual (and as we are the only newspaper that does it sistematically and not only when that can avoid us a legal suit), if we find out we were fooled by someone or that we made a mistake, we’ll be here to correct it in the headlines.
Pedro Tadeu
Concerning the McCanns friens the Correia da Manha reports this:
McCann Couple
Friend's couple would be examined
The Judicial Police has prepared letters of rogatory and they can be sent to England at any moment - via Eurojust or by the General Procurator of the Republic. The aim is to interrogate the friends that were with the McCann couple in Praia da Luz and apprehend objects, such as the diary that Kate is keeping in her house
The couple should be examined after the PJ has received the final results from the laboratory of Birmingham, and everything indicates it could be tomorrow - and also in function of the friend's answers.
Re John
Do you have the link to the genuine text of Pedro Tadeu?
I firmly believe due to research and articles i have read that there are "unappropriate" people working in the PJ and acting as higher levels of authority. I believe in time it will come to light that the church, PJ and some higher authorities will have had some involvement in child abuse/disappearance etc. Just my belief but from day one I have stated that this is highly likely.
So a group of paedophiles decide to abduct a child from someone in the Ocean Club. those holidaying in the club are likely to earn in excess of six figure salaries. They would be highly paid, highly motivated people. The exposure of abducting a child from a family of this kind would be too risky and lead to exposure. Paedophiles arn't stupid. This theory doesn't wash with me.
As PDG remarked earlier, the McCann's should sue. Then it would all come out in court.
Gerry not the father ... ??
I feel like in a badly constructed who-dunnit TV show. Too many twists, too many false leads, too many fashionable ingredients, too many innocent creeps, too many unknowns in the equation ... I feel I will fall asleep if there is another Breaking Rumour.
But I have a quite good feeling re Rebelo. Starting to hope he might lead the case somewhere more tangible after all.
Jose (FR) this is the best I can find - its not online but only in the printed paper:
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=...?pic=rst0kk&
s=2
Jose: snap!
Yes I haven't seen it anywhere else either(blood in other car belonging to mccann aquaintance)but thought that was because I wasn't following the case so intently in july/aug.
Has this site made a mistake?
Maggie wrote (11.29am): "So a group of paedophiles decide to abduct a child from someone in the Ocean Club. those holidaying in the club are likely to earn in excess of six figure salaries. They would be highly paid, highly motivated people. The exposure of abducting a child from a family of this kind would be too risky and lead to exposure. Paedophiles arn't stupid. This theory doesn't wash with me. "
I have to agree with Maggie. Why would a paedophile ring stage such an elaborate abduction? There was simply too much risk at being caught. Makes more sense to snatch a child off a crowded beach or playground or other high traffic area.
You know how easy it is to find out if Gerry is Madeleine's father?
Ask Kate's doctor. He/She would have supervised the fertilization, and he/she would most definitely know if Gerry or another man had given the sperm.
Personally? I think it's absolutely ridiculous for any newspaper, tabloid or not, to not only make the claims but to refuse to back down from them when the people being claimed against tell them to.
Methinks 24Horas should find themselves a new "source close to the investigation"... because the one they have now is turning into a moron.
I haven't read about that either PDG. I started following early Sept. I think, possibly late August.
DC Not sure I would trust Kate or Gerry on that one, only science.
Off topic I know but since i signed up to the diggit thingy i've recieved loads of junk mail. Anyone else?
DC, and
Mistakes have been known to occur in in-vitro labs. Only DNA will be able to determine once and for all who the biological parents are.
Thanks Pinkdrummer girl and jose for the links
Billie -
Mistakes have been known to occur in DNA and forensics labs, too. That fact doesn't seem to dissuade the people who claim that we should put 100% faith in allegedly leaked results of tests that aren't even finished yet, does it?
So who do you put your faith in? If the McCanns and their IVF techs/doctors say that he *is* her father and the DNA labs say that he isn't... who do you believe? Because no matter which one you choose, it means that the other one screwed up.
I don't think it's at all reality that he's not her father. Mainly because they've been testing her DNA, and his, and Kate's, and the twins', since July... and if he weren't her father, we'd have known about it long before now.
Or at least we'd have seen it somewhere other than WS and the Mirror forums before now, because it's been floating around on both of them since August. I've thought for a very long time that these reporters were getting their "headlines" by trolling the forums, and to my mind, this story is just more proof that that's exactly what they're doing.
DC,
If I had to choose, I would absolutely put my faith in the DNA results over the words of the McCanns and/or their doctors simply because I cannot believe anything team McCann says anymore.
But in case I missed something, why is the fact that Gerry may or may not be M's real father even matter at this juncture? I don't understand the significance of it in relation to M's disappearance. I'm thinking it may all be just another tactic to diffuse focus on the real matter i.e. finding out what really happened to M. Or could it be a ruse to somehow garner sympathy for the McCanns?
To pinkdrummergirl,
I didn't sign up for the diggit thing but I have been getting tons of error messages - small pop up screens asking me if I wish to debug due to a runtime error - every time I log onto this new site. Very annoying!
Billie and everyone else:
I really need to know as soon as possible if you encounter a problem like that. Just click here and send me a message if you do. Has anyone else encountered a problem like the one Billie described? I have not, and haven't had anyone else notify me of such a problem.
The site is called "Digg" and it is a social bookmarking site that's incredibly popular and can drive tons of traffic to any website that makes it to Digg's main page. One huge problem I had with CrimeBlog.US and HuffCrimeBlog.com was the fact that if I was lucky enough to have an entry "Dugg", the sites would crash -- this made me very angry, because lots of traffic should be nothing but good for any weblog. Success with an entry bookmarked on Digg shouldn't be able to crash a site hosted by blogspot, though (and this one is, even though it has its own URL). That's why I integrated Digg buttons into entries. You can only use the Digg button if you register for that site -- I am in no way associated with it other than having my own account there. It takes less than 30 seconds to register.
Billie, you may want to see if your browser is out-of-date or if the problem happens in another browser. I'll check Internet Explorer to see if the problem occurs when I use it with that browser.
Thanks,
Steve
From Times today:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle2633827.ece
it says:
" On Tuesday a team of Portuguese detectives visited the ground-floor apartment where the McCanns stayed to take measurements for a detailed reconstruction of events. They were said to have been particularly interested in the small service area beneath the apartment."
So may be this 'service area' is part of the answer as to what was done with the body.
Thanks, Steve. I'll check the status of my browser -- my technical problems may well lie elsewhwere and not at all with your site.
Steve
No technical difficulties here. I use Firefox.
So, the McCanns have officially denied that:
1. they sedated the children
2. that Gerry is not the biological father
I can't find anything where they denied that more children were sleeping in the apartment on May 3rd. Has this been officially denied by the McCanns?
After today - Gerry is not the father and yesterday (?) six/seven kids sleeping in apartment - I think we are being conned. In future I am going to wait a day for the denial before I even think about the allegation.
I think someone predicted before that we were going to get a series of easily denied allegations. Is this a Clarence Mitchell tactic?
Next? - there is no service area?????
Re Karina I can't find anything where they denied that more children were sleeping in the apartment on May 3rd. Has this been officially denied by the McCanns?
Of course!
http://tinyurl.com/32j799
"It's utter rubbish," said Mr Mitchell.
"If you put seven children together, you're going to have a far harder time getting them to sleep than three."
I was also wondering what/where this service area is. I have often had vacations in mediterraenian countries and lived in typical holidays apartments, but never had a service area to call my own. Or is this only for the upper class club holidays? What's it supposed to be used for?
Jose,
Thanks for the link.
Regardless of what the service area is, it seems to me that it would have been searched when Madeleine disappeared.
Maggie said "So a group of paedophiles decide to abduct a child from someone in the Ocean Club. those holidaying in the club are likely to earn in excess of six figure salaries. They would be highly paid, highly motivated people. The exposure of abducting a child from a family of this kind would be too risky and lead to exposure. Paedophiles arn't stupid. This theory doesn't wash with me."
I hasten to add that the paedos in question had to have first checked that the McCanns were so bloody tight fisted that out of their "six figure salaries" they felt the baby sitting service was out of their league. Of course Madeleine was not abducted, who in their right mind (I've just realised that is a contradiction regarding a paedophile) would take a child from a complex that provided a child minding service when there would be many in the district that did not.
Some people on this thread say that team McCann will be following this (and other) threads if so c'mon Clarence earn your coin boy come and join us. Even the P.J. cannot stop exchanges of ideas on the internet. Of course I could be all wrong we maybe already have a "team" member on board, anyone want to own up?
It is possible that a member of the "babysitting" service knew that the mccanns constantly left their children alone and took madeleine - just a thought!!
Also if she wandered off - i do believe there was a report of her in a supermarket - is this true???
hard to decipher fact from fiction these days
Stanley great point..."would take a child from a complex that provided a child minding service when there would be many in the district that did not". I also might add and if not the parents would be awake at that hour, not asleep (very risky).
On a lighter note, would anyone be surprised if Zaza Gabors husband, Prince Von vat's his name appeared on Entertainment Tonight, claiming he was the Dad? Who knows who will pop out for 15 min. of fame?
Lynn I remember reading the staff didn't know these parents had kids.
Dee, 'Prince Von vat's his name' LOL ).....Heaven knows who the real father is (IF) this is true. By all 'accounts' the real father has been contacted and eliminated!
You know when the McCann's strenuously deny something methinks they doth protest too much...
And yes the staff did remark that they were surprised to hear that the Tapas 9 had children. But perhaps that was the night staff...
Maggie & Dee
Looking at Kate and knowing his reputation look no further the dad has got to be David Blunkett!
Just because Kate was artificially inseminated, does not mean that is how the pregnancy occurred. AIs fail regularly, and if Gerry was the problem in conceiving, she may well have had an affair to produce the child she so desperately desired.
But, in my opinion, Gerry is the father. If you put a pic of Gerry, Kate and Madeleine side by side, she is a near perfect mix of them both. The resemblance to both parents is striking.
i read that kate had problems conceiving because of endemetriosis.
the reason for the ivf is cos kate has endemetriosis.
hope im not repeat posting, but last one didnt show up.
Now I have to admit but didn't dare say this in the early stages of this case for fear of appearing as a total anti McCann but I have always had a problem with the likeness of Madeleine with her parents. I thought she bore a little resemblance to Kate but that Gerry was not the father. I always wondered if he was her father.
Endo means that conception is risky. Of all the fertility risks this is the highest. There are however grades for endometriosis. Perhaps Katies was slight - but it would have to mean not involving the fallopian tubes.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/v...e-main-
suspects
I hope this is true (but who knows):
"The final batch, which is considered key to the entire investigation, has been overdue for several weeks but the Daily Express has learned that the crucial results are now ready. The results will be passed on to the McCanns later the same day.
Police on the Algarve believe that the findings will provide them with enough evidence to bring charges against Kate and Gerry McCann."
Regardless, thank goodness the results will be passed on the McCanns... everyone deserves that right; guilty or innocent.
It will be interesting to watch the how each side spins those DNS results (normally considered facts) or can you actually use the word facts in this case? But that's where my mind wants to focus on.
another shocker: maddy dad identified and from Birmingham. 24horas.
Hi All, been working hard so just catching up with developments.
For my two'penorth I'd always beleived that M was the product of selective AI by K & G. I seem to remember that they went abroad for the private treatment because it would be quicker than NHS. BY selective AI I mean that they chose only v. healthy sperm & eggs but they did not choose sex etc.
Once they had M successfully they returned a year later for a second batch to be transplanted rsulting in the twins. I don't see anything unusual in any of this and even if G was not the sperm donor (which I doubt given physical conparitors) I really do fail to see how it matters unless of course he was not the bio father and very obviously alientated towards M which I see no evidence of.
This line of enquiry is for me a bit of a dead end i.e. you only answer the questions you really knew the answers to anyway plus they are not that crucial to the case.
another shocker: real dad has been tracked and is from birmingham. 24horas.
OK guys - I finally found you - you just thot you got rid of me by leaving me on the side of the road - thats called cruelty to sr. citizens - j/k
I still don't believe a word the mccanns say - nor do I believe a word the tapas 7 say - remember if one goes down they all go down - their careers and future are at stake - don't believe mccanns will sue - wouldn't they be deposed ???
I believe gerry is very controlling with kate - have you noticed how she kinda walks a step or two behind him - kinda reminds me of winkler holding her attys hand coming into court -
sorry bout double posting but i cant see if my comment has gone up despite refreshing page several times.
lol and welcome back pdx...
Hi Pinkdrummer,
Could you post the article from 24Horas?
Thanks
WB - You've managed to wrestle out of the Mirror Forum jungle, OMG it's so mad in there. Welcome to sanity and reasonable discussion once again.
Mwoa x Mwoa x on both cheeks,
Lizbee
Lizbee it is very relavent only from the DNA perspective on how the DNA was done; if it was based on a toothbrush, "no", if it was based on K & G's DNA "yes". The first DNA taken was from genetic profile was ‘assembled’ from her parents’ profiles instead of having taken DNA from her belongings, such as toothbrush or hair (link http://www.paternitytestinglabs....deleines-case/)
I can understand the first set being done this way, why would you trust a parent for instance to give you the "right toothbrush"? Hopefully they got all toothbrushes?
So the new test (from that same url in my previous post) "Experts at the Forensic Science Service laboratory in Birmingham have spent more than two months analysing a huge amount of evidence collected by detectives."
I give 2 sh#ts who the father is; I want to see the evidence (blood, car, hair DNA evidence. Unfortunately in this case inconsistent statements will add up (in this case; regardless of spin.
Dee,
I absolutely agree re: DNA & evidence that goes without saying.
I was answering an overarching query re: parenting non-bio children which for me is a non starter.
You are absoluteley correct in focusing on the DNA attribitors and detailed analysis of where,when, etc, deposited.
its just the front page, karina, hope the link works
http://www.24horasnewspaper.com/...pa/
Pagina01.jpg
Here is the link for the biological father from Birmingham
The true father of Madeleine was identified in England by the British policy, by request of the Judiciary Policy, knew the 24horas next to responsible sources of the PJ. The sperm donor that allowed the conception of Madeleine was not interrogated because the authorities confirmed that he was in England the date of the disappearance of the child, 3 of May. According to our sources in the PJ, the biological father of Maddie had nothing to see with the disappearance of the child - as, by the way, the 24horas had notified yesterday. ....
The PJ knows that Gerry McCann is not the biological father of Maddie, as the 24horas notified yesterday and reconfirmed with some responsible sources of the Judiciary Policy and the National Institute of Medicina Legal (INML). "Gerry McCann was not the donor of sperm for Maddie. He was the donor for the twins. But it is possible that Gerry himself does not know that he is not the biological father. It could have happen a exchange in the laboratory ", said to the 24horas source of the INML.
Pinto da Costa, former president of the Institute of Medical jurisprudence of the O'Porto, supports the explanation, without referring to the Maddie case. "Already happenned some cases of artificial insemination where the husband was not donor one time and was donor other times. It is enough that, at that moment of the life, the person has its fertilizadora capacity diminished by reasons several, as exhaustion or stresse extreme ".
http://www.24horasnewspaper.com/...ews.php?
id=7789
Marilia and Pinkdrummer,
Thanks for the links.
How credible is the 24Horas?
I am not sure I understand the article. It says it's possible that Gerry does not know he is not the biological father but 24 Horas has identified the biological father as someone from Birmingham ???
Karina,
Yep, that's what they're saying. As far as how credible they are, I don't know... but if their cover isn't modeled on the old Enquirer covers, I don't know what is.
It says that the PJ knows GM is not the father and that GM may not know he is not. It could have happen a mistake.
A well known scientist says it can happen that the father is not donnor one time due to weak fertilization at thar moment because of stress. He is not commenting on M case but speaking in geberal.
The 24H is kind of a tabloid
Hey Lizbee, I was responding your last question of 8:23. However,my 3rd paragraph wasn't meant for you or anyone in particular just my opinion, probably more to keep "me" on track. I will try to be more careful, I am very sorry.
And now we have more breaking bombshell news...Marilia. I am going to bed, one good thing (in my time zone), when I hit the computer in the morning, you guys have the news digested for me. I appreciate that; I have lost 5 lbs. (LOL). If someone doesn't break soon...they have to be innocent(the pressure), bet Clarence wished he kept his gov.t job! Probably seemed easy in the beginning, who would have known?
I know that in some cases where a man has a low sperm count, the man's sperm is mixed with the donor's just raise the possibility that the baby could be his child (the man with low sperm count).
But even in such cases, it seems to me that the father would know that he probably is NOT the biological father.
Now, if it's true that GErry is not the biological father, doesn't that make all this DNA research invalid ?
Karina
no, on the contrary. Of what i have understood they had the DNA of maddie trough the parents and then they didnt have full matches. Now testing with M true DNA they verified her DNA is too much different from those os the twins and so GM is not the father. Too scinentific for me. That is what I uderstood. Maybe totally wrong lol. PDG explained it very well.
Got it, Marilia.
Well, at least I think I did
Karina, no, the DNA research is in fact completely valid: the fact that Gerry is not the biological father is something that the analysis of M's DNA compared with the DNA of Gerry revealed; there was obviously no genetic match. They had to rule out any chance of the DNA found in the rental car as belonging to the twins, as the McCanns had implied. And since now it appears that M's DNA is completely different from the twins' DNA, the case is much stronger for the police because now they can positively identify whose DNA it was that they discovered in the trunk (boot) of the rental car three weeeks after she disappeared. And I'm betting it was M's.
Thanks, Billie
I hope we get the DNA results tomorrow as they had announced.
I am logging off tonight.
I hope we get more information tomorrow.
First thing I do in the morning is log on to this website and check out the news or what passes as news
Good night or good morning, wherever you are!
G'night Karina. I'm heading off to bed myself. It's nearly midnight here (Canada).
Whew, what an amazing story. It's got me transfixed. Like you, I log on here every day to see what has developed. I can't seem to stay away even though I'm not sure I'm going to like the outcome. Still...a part of me just wants to see this resolved and the matter put to rest. Accident or not...things never should have come to this point and shouldn't have had to. And the whole "Gerry not being the biological Dad" bombshell is an unfortunate consquence of the fact that the investigators simply want to cover all bases and do a thorough job before bringing any charges. This whole sorry side story might never have come out if only those persons responsible for setting it all in motion had been truthful from the very beginning...
Dee, that link you gave us earlier tonight: http://www.paternitytestinglabs....deleines-case/)
which dealt with the DNA test results on M.
It worked earlier this evening, yet when I just checked it again to reread the article the link was invalid. Coincidence? Or possibly someone getting to it and pulling it?
Billie -
It's still there. Your link above got truncated and it's got a } at the end, which is invalidating it.
http://tinyurl.com/34yttw
It's just a blog, so I guess it's no more reliable than any of the other "sources" we've got floating around. Interesting to note, though, that right along with the DNA construction is "...the results may have been severely compromised because of sample mistreatment and contamination..."
And if that's true, it's never going to get us anywhere.
Thanks, Dee. My mistake.
And if the results were contaminated (heaven forbid), that's very sad indeed. I'm so hoping that this case can be solved and the parties responsible be punished.
The Diario de Noticias reports today that the resort has been visited Tuesday by six elements of the Crime Investigation Department of Portimăo, leaded by the chief inspector Tavares de Almeida. The following day- at the same moment Paulo Rebelo was assuming officially his functions as coordinator in the case inquiry- the team returned to the apartment, doing a new reconstruction of the night of the crime.
In this second visit, the PJ was interested in the path from the apartment to the Tapas restaurant and the other apartments rented by the McCann's friends present in Praia da Luz. Some inspectors were seen near the church of the Lady of Light, in front of a landscape square that was an old cemetery.
The Jornal de Noticias reports today that the (pedophilia) operation “Predator” has nothing to do with the Maddie case. The PJ denies vehemently the association done by the English press.
IF this story is true...
why is gerry father of twins but not of madeleine? Kate has an affair? lab mix up? Or this sperm mixing thing they do (which I imagine is to encourage competitive sperm)?
Did the Mccanns know? If not, god, they are really going through the wringer...if we are shocked, how must they feel?
Thinking along darker lines...if Gerry knew that he wasn't the father, wouldn't it make more sense for him to be the one that had the accident with madeleine(after all childen are most at risk from a step parent, not just a fairy tale but unfortunately a statistic).
pdg - that's a pretty big IF - and even if he isn't the biological father he isn't a step parent in the usual sense is he?
We are told the forensic evidence is back today and that the McCanns will get a copy - presumably because they are arguidos - so it will be interesting what stories come out in the press following this.
Going back to abduction theories - it is interesting that there hasn't been a single leak story (from what I can remember) which provides any fresh indicators for abduction. All the stories are countering internet or press rumours about McCann involvement. Some witnesses seem to give opinions that she was abducted and that the McCanns couldn't have doen anything - but no real reasons apart from subjective personality assessments.
This leaves the cuddlecat and Jane Tanner's mysterious man. For instance if it was a planned abduction then why carry her away wrapped in blanket? The car park is right next to the 'front' door - why not bundle her in a car and drive away top speed to Spanish border? And the cuddle cat thing is that supposed to be evidence?
So come on all ye who believe in abduction - why isn't there a stream of evidence/stories coming out ot support this scenario?
Well there was the dodgy British looking bloke standing on the stairs leading up to the balcony. But who in their right mind would pass such a bloke and not alert the concierge?
It's very hard to prove abduction in this case. I think there are several reasons behind it. First of all the testimony of the parents and their friends keep changing and while this is no indication of murder it does raise red flags and brings in a question over their innocence.
Lack of DNA of the perp. A trace is always left behind. A group of well educated doctors trampling all over the crime scene is puzzling behaviour. Given their backgrounds, the expectation would be that they would know how to handle this.
I did ask a couple of threads ago for someone to show proof of an abduction. However the replies were not convincing.
"We are told the forensic evidence is back today"
Acc to the article linked above by Dee, they will come on Monday
Police chief Alipio Ribeiro said ... "as it was revealed that the results of make-or-break forensic tests carried out in Britain will be presented on Monday".
Someone in another forum, tired by the speculation, opened a thread for 'factual information' of the case. Needless to say that the thread never got more than some 20 odd replies, half of them paste+copy from newspaper articles, and the other half OT.
But there is one entry which has some info I didn't know yet, although it seems to be from the mirro forum, so some of you might have seen it. I copy it here:
The McCanns’ friends
Rachel and Matthew Oldfield
Rachell Manpilly is 36 and she is married to Matthew Oldfield. The couple has a daughter, who was only 18 months old when Madeleine McCann disappeared. But now even so the Oldfields asked for the Ocean Club
’s babysitting service. Matthew met Gerry McCann when both doctors worked together at a hospital in Leicester. Matt has a pending accusation for medical negligence in that hospital, after a late diagnosis resulted in the death of a patient. This was not the first time the Oldfields spent their holidays with this group. The last trip had been to Greece – where they also stayed in a resort of the Ocean Club’s group – but that time Gerry and Kate did not accompany them.
Dianne Webster
63 year old Dianne Webster is the oldest element of the group. This credit controller is the mother of Fiona Payne and the grandmother of two of the children from the group that was spending their holidays in the Ocean Club.
To the portuguese police, Dianne told she could not precise which elements abandoned the Tapas restaurant during dinner, on the night that Madeleine disappeared. Fiona
’s mother is also the only witness that said each couple was responsible for their own children, and did not enter their friends’ apartments.
After Kate entered the restaurant – visibly upset and yelling “they’ve taken our Madeleine” – Dianne was the only one who stayed seated at the Tapas’ table. Which she only left five minutes later.
David and Fiona Payne
It was David Payne who organised the group
’s holidays at Praia da Luz. The reservation was made over the internet, after a good experience with the Ocean Club’s group, in Greece. This was the second time that David came to Portugal. The first time was eleven years ago, before he got married.
David and Fiona have been together for seven years and are both doctors, like the McCanns
’ friends. The couple has two children and they were the only ones in the group who used the babyphone system to keep watch over the children during dinners – which always took place without the small ones.
Fiona was back in the Algarve on July 11, along with Rachel and Russell, in order to give their third deposition to PJ.
Russell O’Brien and Jane Tanner
Russell O
’Brien is a doctor and lives in Exeter – the same english city where the sister of Robert Murat lives.
After studying at the same university as David Payne, O
’Brien met Jane, with whom he has two children. The friendship between Russell and Dav
Continues:
After studying at the same university as David Payne, O
’Brien met Jane, with whom he has two children. The friendship between Russell and David is so strong that he chose him as his wedding godfather when he made his relationship with Fiona official, in Italy.
Coincidentally, Jane and Kate became pregnant at the same time, as the O
’Brien couple’s oldest daughter is exactly the same age as Maddie.
Jane Tanner is one of the key witnesses in the â€Madeleine case’, given the fact she says she saw a suspicious man, walking with a child in his arms, on the night of the disappearance. Jane describes the individual with extreme precision, although she was not capable to recognize the child he was carrying. The man that Jane saw has dark, thick hair and is 1.70 m tall.
And about Gerry
Gerry McCann was the youngest of five children of Irish immigrants. His father was a joiner; his mother worked in a biscuit factory. He went on to study medicine at the University of Glasgow, became Scotland
’s under19 1,500 metres running champion and briefly dabbled in sports medicine. It was through contacts that he made working with Scotland’s under21 football team that Cristiano Ronaldo and John Terry were persuaded to issue appeals for Madeleine.
24horas on tv: comment copied from mirror forum:
"The 24 Horas reporter who is behind the news reports about Gerry not being Maddie's father, was interviewed on TVI today. He said his sources are very credible and he heard the same story from four different people: one from the British police, another from the PJ and two from the Instituto de Medicina Legal. He said the police think the McCanns are behind Maddie's death, disposed of her body with the help of a third person, and that all their friends knew Maddie had been killed, lied and helped cover it up. When asked what the police needed to prove it, he said all the results from the FSS, which the PJ haven't got yet, but have knowledge of a few via phone."
The editor and the journalist are risking 2 years in jail and a huge payout, if they are wrong.
If they are right, I cannot express how shocked and disgusted I am, that their friends would all collude to cover up the death of a little girl. Has there ever been another case like this?
pdg - if all their friends indeed knew - then I shall give up on the human race! what arrogance that would be! but somehow I can't believe it right now.
Martina - facts about the Tapas 9 - have you noticed how little there is about Kate - its as if she has not personal history. Its the same on findmadeleine.com. Not reading anything into this - but it is odd. Gerry sounds quite driven with his sporting background etc.
Yet it seems so extreme a thing to say The Tapas 7 all covered this up - its more like a movie than real life - I just can't swallow that, yet with this case, nothing seems to be of surprise.
John, no, what I copied was headed "The McCann Friends", it was only about the 7. I added the paragraph about Gerry from another Source.
But still true, we don't know much about Kate, although she's always at the center of the story. Especially her family is not much heard of.
I don't know why, but the thought of all of them covering up the truth doesn't shock me as much as it does you both.
If it's true, I think there must be reason that's important for them ...
According to RTP this afternoon, the PJ didn’t receive the test results done by the laboratory in Birmingham concerning the vestiges found in the car rented by the McCanns.
The PJ isn’t convinced that the results should be enough to prove that the McCanns are involved in the supposed death of Maddie.
The inquiry team has been strengthened with 4 inspectors of the homicide squad.
The letters of rogatory would soon be sent to interrogate the McCann’s friends.
Martina - would you cover up - even for your best friend?
John, if my own children would otherwise be in danger of being taken away from me because some secret would come to light that would make me look very bad - maybe!
What Martina would do is not relevant to the case: she is not a McCann’s friend.
We know anything about the psychology of the McCann’s friends. I don't think that we can put ourselves into their shoes!
Nevertheless, I think that a theory that all the 7 friends are involved to cover the supposed death of Maddie is highly improbable.
I agree with Jose regarding the theory that all 7 friends are involved. I do believe that perhaps two are involved and that the others don't know or have strong suspicions. They are all professionals with a lot at stake if a fall were to happen. I would have thought also it would have been a case of every man for himself unless there was a strong link/bond between them that would prevent this. Remember, only 2 couples left their children alone in the apartment without any supervision performing their own 'baby listening service'. o'Brien/Tanner and the McCanns.
I am curious as to the motive of making up a kidnapping story.
Let's assume that Madeleine died of a bad reaction to sleeping medication.
What exactly would the McCanns risk?
prison? how long?
the twins taken away from them?
We've had cases here in the US where a child was left in a car and died because of the heat. Yet, the mother did not have to go to prison.
Also, why the worldwide search? They seeked more publicity than was needed. They're smart people, why didn't they keep a low profile, move back to the UK and hope that everybody would forget about the case.
Karina "Also why the worldwide search?" I think that was taken out their hands. On the night it happened Gerry phoned his brother and within 4 hours it was on Sky News! Then Gerry's sister wades in and before you know it we have a campaign, a charity, an appeal, millionaires throwing money around, and K&G cannot just crawl into a crevice and disappear.
I do feel that the members of the thread are all now reluctantly moving in the same inevitable direction. As several people have pointed out there is absolutely no evidence of an abduction. If there were you can be sure Clarance would have told us about it! I do not think that G not being M's biological father is a factor. If he had murdered M there is no way that his 7 pals would cover up. However if he & K over-sedated her or killed her in a freak accident then I am with that venerable philosopher pdx77, nobody covers for each others mistakes like the medical profession. There are literally thousands of people dying every year here in the U.K. in our hospitals of bugs brought on by poor hygiene standards, what other profession would get away with that? I am afraid in this country doctors are still regarded as a law unto themselves.
Jose - strictly I suppose you are right that what Martina would do is not relevant - but in assessing the probability of something we have to draw on our experience as human beings and I would say that (in agreement with you) that 7 people conspiring together without a single person weakening is most improbable.
Karina - it may be that the family and others launched the publcity campaign in a way which left Gerry and Kate with no option than to follow it. They couldn't really refuse without arousing questions - so keeping it low key was taken out of their hands.
I am trying to avoid subjective assessments but something is telling me that Gerry actually enjoys all the attention.
Karina,
Prison, the twins removed, never working with children again as well remember, lifestyle gone - I think that's a lot to loose. But you do have a point and it's a good one. I suppose once the train of publicity started it's proving difficult to get off. I also can't get the image of hole digging out of my mind.
I want to once speak up for the abduction theorie. There might not be any evidence, but the classic three points to look at when solving a crime are
1) motive
2) means
3) opportunity
Re 1) any paedophile in the area (and we know now for sure that there are many in Portugal) had a motive
Re 2 + 3) there is not much needed: watch the tourists for a couple of days, find out who leaves the kids unattended, maybe even get a tip from one of the waiters? Then park the car in front, go in, take Maddie, go out, and off you go. The door was open, the street badly lit, not much people around it said in one article. That's the means and the opportunity, pretty easy.
There is nothing particular in favour of abduction (only Kate's cuddly toy story, and Jane's mystery man), but there is also nothing strongly AGAINST it.
Martina, I think the fact that there is simply no evidence of an abduction makes the case for one pretty weak.
But it's a fact that an abduction is so much more easy than any other scenario so far discussed. And remember Occram's razor? Simple is more likely.
I agree with Martina. The abduction is the easiest solution to accept because no other plausible scenario has been offered.
But, to be truthful, I am having some serious reservations. Maybe I've been on this thread too long
Robert Murat has been on BBC news saying he wants to be cleared. He hasn't spoken to the police for months or seen his daughter and has no money left. His aunt spoke up for him and said he needs to rebuild his life.
Karina and Martina - what would evidence AGAINST abduction look like? How do you prove a negative?
"Paulo Rebelo, the man in charge of the hunt for missing Madeleine McCann is bringing in a crack team to solve the case. Paulo Rebelo recently took over the inquiry into Madeleine
’s disappearance and has appointed four senior officers to boost the invesitgation.
Each of the four senior officers bought in to boost the investigation are experts in their field and have been seconded from other areas of the police in the country.
Paulo Rebelo takes over the previous senior officer on the Madeleine case, Goncalo Amaral who was allegedly sacked after accusing the McCanns of manipulating the media.
The new members of the team include a chief inspector and an inspector brought in from the Lisbon headquarters of the Policia Judiciaria (PJ). Both are specialists in homicide and it is expected that they will concentrate on the theory that Madeleine was murdered.
The third member will focus on examining data and pursuing new lines of inquiry and the fourth is an inspector from Portugal’s serious crimes police section."
http://www.product-reviews.net/2...madeleine-case/
PS. Is abduction 'easy' because you find it hard to imagine the parents being involved?
http://www.product-reviews.net/2...madeleine-case/
Paulo Rebelo, the man in charge of the hunt for missing Madeleine McCann is bringing in a crack team to solve the case. Paulo Rebelo recently took over the inquiry into Madeleine
’s disappearance and has appointed four senior officers to boost the invesitgation.
Each of the four senior officers bought in to boost the investigation are experts in their field and have been seconded from other areas of the police in the country.
Paulo Rebelo takes over the previous senior officer on the Madeleine case, Goncalo Amaral who was allegedly sacked after accusing the McCanns of manipulating the media.
The new members of the team include a chief inspector and an inspector brought in from the Lisbon headquarters of the Policia Judiciaria (PJ). Both are specialists in homicide and it is expected that they will concentrate on the theory that Madeleine was murdered.
The third member will focus on examining data and pursuing new lines of inquiry and the fourth is an inspector from Portugal’s serious crimes police section.
Hmm,
Just catching up on speculation... to put my tuppence worth (and a bit more to allow for inflation and taxes!)into the discussion here.
As you know I have felt right from the start that there's something very odd about this story, not only in events not fitting together and the timeline being impossible; but also the way they all have behaved. There's a secret, something which ties them together, bonds their silence. I have no idea what this could be and we can all speculate but we won't know until one of them talks.
But I'm a very intuitive person and I know when there's a cover up and there is one here. That's not to say I think G & K killed M, she could still have wandered off or been abducted. But they (and I mean all of them) are not telling the true story of what actually happened that night of that I am 100% sure.
To solve this case we first have to unravel fact from fiction on the evening of 3rd May 07 in PDL MW resort.
Whatever this secret is it's big enough, in their minds at least, to threaten livlihoods, status and the future for those involved. Which is I think why some commenters have suggested bizarre things like swinging and much worse (nuff said on that score).
I have also always felt that the initial impetus for full media coverage came from Gs UK family, I remember John McCann's face being everywhere in the first week or so, but I also agree that Gerry loves it all. In fact egocentric behaviour seems a bit of a family failing for the McCann's with even the unbecoming Auntie Phil enjoying far more than her fair share of 15 minutes of fame. Perhaps with poverty being generationally closer they have more of an appetite and fight for furthering themselves.
Kate's family are far more subdued in this respect and seem like an ordinary stable upper working/lower middle class family with high aspirations and a comfortable outlook on life. I can imagine that there has been some conflict between the families as they are not alike in outlook and morality.
Gerry is definitely a highly focused control freak with limited emotional range which is why although he courts media attention he is actually far less able than he believes himself to be at handling it appropriately, which is why he comes across the way he does. I've no doubt that these qualities are excellent for his chosen career but not good for PR. Does all this mean he can hide things better, absolutely it does' but what exactly is he and the rest of them hiding?
"Is abduction 'easy' because you find it hard to imagine the parents being involved?"
YES, John.
Lizbee - good post, great questions, good observations - what is your intuition on what they are hiding?
Karina - why do you fiind it hard to imagine they are involved?
Abduction is NOT the easy solution to this problem. Far from it. Abduction by an organised paedophile ring (and they would have to be if sitting in an expensive location waiting for an opportunity) is a complex, sinister and multilayered scenario that if uncovered impacts upon the community/country with horrendous consequences. As for the opportune abduction - simply not plausible as the family were only there for a week. Think about it. If the staff were surprised that the couple had children then so would a paedophile/abductor.
Why are those close to the missing child being avasive? Red flag behaviour that cannot be ignored.
Liz, very interesting observations. I agree that Gerry is a narcissistic personality (and to a certain extent Kate).
I guess I might be one of the ones who has given the impression they think abduction is unlikely.
The reasons are these.
There is the apparent absence of any DNA or other trace of an abductor. There appear to be no verifiable sightings (I think Martina puts it well "only Kate's cuddly toy story, and Jane's mystery man" neither of which appear to be stood up by anyone else). There is also the fact that the other children a) were not targetted by the putative abductor and b) slept through.
(The apparent sleeping through everything of the twins interests me a lot. Perhaps another post...)
There is also the fact that the opportunity, if the Tapas group/McCanns accounts are to be accepted, would have been limited to really quite small windows of time when someone from the group was not in the vicinity checking up on some child or another.
One of the problems I think the McCanns have is that if their checking up stories are true, it actually makes their abduction story less likely. Possibly grimly ironic.
I would say that abduction from the aprtment is less likely all other things considered than Madeleine just wandering off and coming to harm in some other location (perhaps by some third party or perhaps alone) which more eaily fits the circumstances Martina thinks make abduction possible. Poor old Occam, he's very busy here.
The big problem with both the abduction and the 'wandering off' hypotheses is the question of whether Madeleine was dead in the apartment.
You may be bored hearing me say this, but I think if the police do have evidence (which we have yet to see authenticated) that Madeleine is dead and that she was dead in or around the apartment, a) it is clear that neither abduction nor 'wandering off' really account for that and b) it is very (getting more) difficult to see how the parent/s would not be implicated in some way.
Sorry to go back but I too am catching up after a busy few days...
I'd like to comment on the question of a lie detector test.
Some people think the McCanns not taking a test is suspicious. I disagree. If I was the McCanns; and if (possibly especially if) I was innocent of any crime, I certainly would not be taking a lie detector test.
It has no legal status either in the UK or in Portugal (I understand). Therefore its not relevant.
Also the risks are all on one side. If the test is negative (detects no "lie") you are no further forward - it proves nothing except that you may be able to lie convincingly. If the test is positive (detects a "lie") then you are putting yourself in jeopardy unnecessarily.
I would think if the McCanns have lawyers of any value they will have been given this advice. The fact they appear to be follwoing this good advice means nothing for their guilt or innocence of charges which have yet to be even formed let alone pressed against them.
2 things off the top of my head:
1) Lack of background info about K. I noticed this in the above post, and also in this week's People magazine spread, which was focused on her. I expected far more shots of her growing up than were provided, more about her childhood, some friends, pictures of the Healy family...
To quote a previous poster/thread, "The silence is deafening". I think that if K really was such the gentle, kind, benevolent soul the McCs would like us to believe, that people would be coming out of the woodwork to attest to that fact - most of all her immediate family! Hmmm.
Just further lends credibility to the claim that K became violent after being named arguido. I have always sensed a temper on her - I interact with physicians of her ilk every day - and often wonder if that proported temper could have to do with what actually happened to M.
2) I, too, am unimpressed with the leak about G not being M's bio father. Not necessarily relevant - if true, and even if he knows, I do not feel that it would be motive for murder.
However, if they were swingers, or had some big secret like that (which was publicly unacceptable), that would be clear motive to keep M's death a secret.
If I were a betting person, I would say that there were more than just the McC children in the apartment (perhaps not the Payne children), they were all sedated and supposed to be sleeping, but something went horribly wrong with M (allergic reation, overdose, aspiration of vomit into lungs, or a physical accident from being drugged and trying to climb around an apartment (maybe to reach a cuddle cat?))... A story had to be concocted, and this whole case began picking up steam...
Just some thoughts. Sorry for being disjointed, but this is just a lot to get my mind around.
Emma that was a brilliant post. You have cleared up a couple of things for me regarding Kate. Mmmm that was a light bulb moment. Thank you.
@ John
Abduction looks easier when you think about the three points (motive, means, opportunity) as I laid out above.
When you think about accident or murder these three points become much much harder to imagine.
That is the only reason why I said it's easier.
No, you can't prove a negative, but clear evidence for murder or accident would be a proof against abduction. So far we have not seen that.
Hence I stay on the fence!
Emma
A very well thought out post. Amongst it you said "they were all sedated and supposed to be sleeping, but something went horribly wrong with M (allergic reaction, overdose, aspiration of vomit into lungs,)" Please do not overlook the fact that Dr O'Brians daughter also vomited that night, resulting in his total change of clothing.
I keep mentioning this as nobody else does. Here is a man, one of the tapas 7 who on his own admission (and it is about the only one made by any of them) was absent from the table for a considerable period of time (precise time still seems to be disputed) and returned with an entire change of clothing. During this period of time his partner (Jane Tanner) has seen a man carrying a child in pink pyjamas, whom nobody else in the whole of Portugal saw! It really does fit the time lines and crime scene better than pickling in red wine, alien abduction and paedophile waiters which have taken up much more space on this thread. As far as knowledge and involvement are concerned this reduces those directly involved from tapas 9 to tapas 4. The remaining 5 could be described as wise monkeys.
John,
My intuition on what they are hiding is equally split between two opposing theories, either:
a) Nobody checked on the children at all that night or on previous nights, there were far more incidences of 'neglect' than we know about (remember the story about the adult party being 15 miles from the complex without any of the children one night!). All the adult members were party to/involved in this type of inappropriate behaviour and all feel guilty by association. Once the 'lie' re: checking etc. had been agreed they're all sticking to it as to do otherwise may mean social services involvement, loss of status, etc. Note that this theory allows for abduction/wander.
b) There was a terrible accident, or tragic misfortune that cost Maddie her life. I remember when I was in Tunisia with my twins when they were 4 yrs old and they both got ear infections from the pool (they were never out of it blees 'em) it was horrendous because it made them really crabby and they were obviously in pain, I went to the doctor and he prescribed ear drops and a 'calpol-like' mild pain releiver. When I cashed in the prescription I was gobsmacked to receive vials of powder and it had to be explained to me that in hot countries medication was rarely made up, you mixed it yourself with distilled water. It had apallingly written 'English' instructions on the slip of paper and I was worried to death that I might mix this medication wrongly, as it happens (and I had read it 10 times anyway) all was okay. My point is that things are different when you're abroad and what they may have done in England e.g. dosing with Calpol without much thought may have had completely different outcomes in PDL.
There is also the possibility that Kate snapped and lashed out causing M to fall badly, perhaps down those steep steps to the appt., or that Madeleine had an accident on her own for which they (K & G but perhaps all of them by omission in challenging their friends actions) felt strongly that they would be blamed especially if this happened whilst they were out at the Tapas bar or elsewhere leaving the children alone. I don't for one minute think that this was premeditated or properly thought out.
Stanley,
We are all aware that O'Brien was dealing with a 'vomiting child' but can we prove whose vomiting child it was?
Martina - you sit on the fence. Does this mean you have no clear evidence of abduction? I don't myself go so far as to cry murder, but I lean towards accidental death. No incontrovertible evidence of course but people have been convicted on circumstantial evidence before...
Lizbee,
Kate was an anaethetist prior to being a general practitioner. I would have thought she of all people would know about sedation.
@ Maggie: I'm not sure my post was "brilliant", but I thank you for such kind words! I just cannot shake this case from my consciousness, and like the eloquent Lizbee, my intuition tells me that K & G have not been telling the truth from the very beginning. I feel that if I think about it hard enough, I may figure it out! Call me naive!
@ Stanley: I agree with you 100% wholeheartedly My post was terribly disjointed, so I am glad to see that some sense was made from it! Yes, I did not carry my theory any further, but to continue my personal speculation, I would say that he is definitely the key Tapas player. I was never convinced that his child was actually ill - it just beggars belief that any parent, let alone BOTH, would possibly be OK with leaving a vomiting child, period. Let alone a mere toddler. So, I would bet the vomitus was M's, and that he likely did use that window of time to translocate M's body (the beach, the service area in the basement), and thus needed the change of clothes (probably disposed of his own during that time, as to not leave scent behind).
Also, as physicians, even in a foreign country, it would not be hard to ascertain where a nearby hospital disposed of medical waste (ie body parts). Not saying that M was taken there necessarily, but incriminating items could be disposed of forever.
It's been said before, but I'll repeat it again: What happens among doctors, stays among doctors. Trust me.
It's almost as if Jane reported the man carrying the child just in case that O'B was spotted taking her away. The description is basically of him, from what I understand. But I do not think that this was done without K & G's blessing, however. I think this was part of the concocted plan that went awry.
How could they have possibly foreseen the upcoming media frenzy on the night of May 3? I think if they had predicted the extent of the media attention, that they would have been much more deliberate and careful from the beginning (ex. not blogging, not raising the alarm when and how they did, etc). I also think that very oversight is what will cause this case to unravel ultimately - there are enough little discrepancies...
Agreed, Lizbee, but perhaps that knowledge gave her a false sense of safety or security about anaesthetics. Physicians and scientists can become very blase when prescribing and using potentially very harmful drugs and chemicals, even when they know better, sometimes they take risks, calculated risks. And sometimes those risks come with a very high cost.
Emma,
I understand totally the pact between doctors. I trust you...
Clarence has just been on BBC News. The McCanns deny giving any of their children sedatives and Gerry is Madeleines father. The only thing he omitted to mention is when the libel suit against these "unfounded allegations" would commence. Surely out of four lawyers one of them has experience in this field?
By the way hasn't Clarence aged 10 years in a month!
Maggie, of course there is no clear evidence of abduction, nor is there for accident or murder, as far as we know.
So what else CAN one do but sit on the fence? I don't like to conclude because I feel either way I will be on shaky ground. We can only speculate and have done so many times here.
Yes, I can imagine an accident. Maybe like lizbee said Kate snapped and Maddie fell down the stairs and hurt her head. Maybe she lost consciousness for a while and Kate called one of her friends for a second opinion whether this might be serious. Maybe they all concluded it is not and she doesn't need to go to a hospital. But head trauma can lead to death hours later, even if there isn't a visible wound on the head. So Maddie dies later, so now the friend has the same need to cover up his mistake as Kate has.
I can well imagine that. But is there evidence for it? No.
And what keeps nagging me with all the death scenarios is the never satisfyingly answered question, what happened to the body?
We keep discussing possible ways of how she might have died and who might have been involved. Let's discuss these other important questions if we are to believe Madeleine died that night: who took the body away, where did he/she hide it, and why hasn't it been found yet?
These questions are not easy to answer. I can only think of beach and ocean, but the beach has been searched as far as I know and the ocean - well where to get a boat so quickly?
I can imagine several accident scenarios, but how the body was disposed of is a more tricky one.
Any bright ideas anybody? Stanley maybe? Always so in favour of the accident and cover up theorie. If you think Russel was involved, what did he do between 9 and 10, where did he put the body?
Because without that question being answered all the accident theories don't hold.
Martina the sea is a short walk from the complex. There is also the possibility that no-one seems to know the answer to, that a hire car was available amongst the tapas 9. We never seem to have had this confirmed or denied.
Hi just catching up all good posts, the only theory in mind as well, is accidental death as you all have eloquently mentioned possible theories.
Martina the body could have been disposed of very easily in my opinion in the road work ditches. The trenches were about three feet deep and already dug it would be very easy with you hands to loosen the soil on the side and cover the body. You wouldn't need a shovel or anything. If you look at the map the area starts very close to the hotel and goes down to the ocean & church. It could be a coincidence the dogs followed a trail down to the church and ocean. Gerry's angry reaction "find the body and prove it," you have to remember the road is now all filled in. I have the maps if anyone is interested.
Jane T. could be telling the truth & she could have scene someone, perhaps didn't actually recognize the person. Could perhaps have been ROB. It wouldn't have taken long and could explain why he changed his clothes. Mentioned before a blanket (perhaps used in their stroller or brought from home for the beach) could have been brought back as it would have been identifying and was in the car for disposal. The blanket could have also been stored in the storage area before making it to the boot of the car. All speculation on my part for theory purposes.
It has occurred to me if she was near the church perhaps that is one reason why Kate went to church everyday, yet when see went home to UK she went once a week?
Well fence sitting is ok - but I haven't read anything which goes against the PJ's working theory. The more I think about it the more McSceptic I become.
I agree with practically everyone that they are hiding something. Their behaviour and demeanour are not straightforward. Gerry particularly seems to be playing some game or spinning some line. To do that when your own daughters life is at stake is extraordinary.
Its all about K&G defending themselves. Where is the effort to find Madeleine? If I was them I would be frantically pushing the abduction idea - appealing for fresh evidence - its long since they have been saying how they cannot speak because of the secrecy laws. I would say stuff the secrecy laws - find my daughter! I'll do anything! Not spending other peoples money on lawyers and spin doctors.
Phew! got that off my chest. I have no time for them - but that as usual does not mean they are guilty.
At the rear of PDL is an expanse of scrubland with some sandy parts. Sand is a conserver of a body. It contains a high salt content that helps mumification. A mumified body (I do so hate to write about this) is very lightweight and will also shrink in size. When buried in sand, with off shore winds, the body fluids quickly dissipate and dessication is expedited.
To give you an example - ever seen a dead animal on a beach? To determine time of death if the corpse is fresh is not difficult but after a couple of day's it hard to know how long it's been there.
Dee said "Jane T. could be telling the truth & she could have scene someone, perhaps didn't actually recognize the person. Could perhaps have been ROB."
So Dee, Jane Tanner failed to recognise her partner and father of their children Russell O"Brian. As Emma said "it's almost as if Jane reported the man carrying the child just in case that O'B was spotted taking her away. The description is basically of him, from what I understand. But I do not think that this was done without K & G's blessing, however. I think this was part of the concocted plan that went awry."
If my theory is correct this is indeed an excellent part of the cover up. If RO'B disposed of the body and had been seen by a member of staff or another holiday maker carrying M whose testimony that this "man" was definitely not Russell would be more convincing than that from his long time partner Ms Tanner?
John,
I agree and that's why my posts rattle on about the details and timeline of the 4 hrs in question on the night. (I'm assuming here that the PJ have verifiable records that place M in creche from 1.30 - 6.00 pm. So I'm taking my 4 hrs from 6.00 - 10.00 pm.)
Personally I gave up trying to figure out the J.T. story, once I ruled out the abduction theory. I agree Emma's theory is certainly a strong possibility. If you remember the sketch drawing she gave, the blank face; it could be possible she didn't recognize RO'B because of the position of the child and the blanket. But we also have G & the other guy not seeing what she saw. On the SOL site that had some animative movement on that (before the latest version by someone else), they had Jane past the McCann apt. and almost to the crossroad road. I questioned why would she be there if she was going to her apt? I don't understand the Jane T. sighting story, except she couldn't describe the face.
Stanley, our theories dovetail nicely together. I agree, that would be one of the more "excellent" or well-planned parts of this coverup.
I think Jane and RO'B have much more at stake in this whole ruse, for many reasons, and therefore would be less likely to crack under pressure.
But, I think it would be wise (although admittedly, my medical knowledge far exceeds that of my law) to keep the pressure on the other members of the Tapas group who may have tacitly offered their support to the McCanns on the night of May 3, but who may be aghast at the lengths that the McC & O'B parties have gone to keep up this elaborate charade.
I can't help but think (egotistically, narcissistically perhaps ) that we are getting closer and closer to the real truth. And, further, that Team McC does follow all the blogs/posts, and knows that they have not fooled us all.
Bottom line - which I often remind my children - is that IT IS ALWAYS BETTER TO TELL THE TRUTH. Its a simple idea, and it has widespread application. Lies have a way of coming back to bite you...
Well, Martina,
You and I are just about the only 2 people left here who are "sitting on the fence".
I envy all the others who are so convinced that their judgment is right and that the McCanns are guilty. In my mind, things are not so black or white.
By the way, a paedophile does not necessarily mean a big operation. Many do their deeds on their own.
Oh, I just read another post where someone make a good point. In the www.findmadeleine.com website, Gerry writes that Mr Ripeiro
"... has again emphasised that all lines of the investigation, not only Madeleine
’s death, are open and that much of what has been written is pure speculation..."
Notice Madeleine's death"
hmmmmmmmmmm...
Karina,
I don't this is as simple as those who are 'sitting on the fence' and those who are not because it then begs the question 'sitting on the fence' about what aspect? That K & J (plus or minus help) were responsible/guilty of far more than merely leaving infants unattended, That the T9 did/did not give full & accurate (as far as they were able) accounts of their own and others movements that night.
The problem I keep returning to (and I know I must sound like a huge bore on this issue but I believe it's crucial before you can move futher down the road on this) is simply this:
If everyone is telling the truth about the checking and their movements then the windows for a possible abduction are so tiny as to make them unfeasible. Gerry himself knows this which is why he belatedly came up with the idea that the abductor must have been in the apartment when he checked just prior to bumping into Mr Wilkie (my theory is that Gerry had actually gone back for his wallet or some such thing and that's why he was so vague about whether or not M was actually there, the purpose of his going back was not to check on the children, I still maintain that checking was not done on that night or other nights in the manner the group has attested to).
So lets suspend belief for a few minutes and give the T9s testimonies a whirl. According to K & G everything was fine when thay left the children sleeping peacefully at around 8.35, they arrived at the Tapas bar at 8.40, in fact they had all arrived by 9.00 pm (remember that there would have been lots of movement past the appartment during this time period 8.35 - 9.00 pm making an abduction impossible in this time zone); I can't remember the exact time but G and Mr W bumped into each other ouside reception/start of the alleyway and chatted for 15 minutes around this time Jane T was also doing her own checking (crucially not seeing either of these men in a very confined area but seeing the 'man with child in blanket' which neither of the two afforementioned saw at all!); so we can deduct this time zone from the hour we have left to play with which leaves us with about 40 minutes here and there in the 9.00 pm - 10.00 pm slot, of course many of these minutes are covered by accounts of checking by Kate and R'OB. What you are left with is slithers of time here and there in which an abduction could take place and with all this apparent movement an abductor would have to have been very brave/foolhardy indeed and keep close tabs on the whole scene for the entire evening to be in with a chance of success. But there is nowhere around to keep such close scrutiny without being spotted. And no-one at all spotted anyone hanging around, acting in an unusual manner.
I truly want to believe that Ms parents are guilty of no more than a tragic lack of judgement on this occasion when their 'parental responsibilty' barriers were down because they were on holiday. But you ponder over those facts re: the 'opportuni
Lizbee
Ok, you're saying there is no opportunity for an abduction but in the same time frame, they would manage to transport Madeleine's dead body somewhere and nobody would have noticed anything ! I find that just as difficult to believe.
Well, if they were lying about their movements because they either comitted a crime or covered up an acident that would change the whole time line. You are quite right Karina they can't have it both ways. Either there was no time for an abduction and therefore no time either for a 'clean up/removal' of a body. Or.... wait for it.... someone is lying about the timeline.
Karina, I hate to say it, but at that point, on May 3, M's "dead body" would not have been all that unusual looking... probably looked asleep. Just sayin'.
God rest her little soul if what I believe in my heart of hearts is true, and that she was accidentally killed by her otherwise well-meaning parents.
This case literally pains me, as I have a daugher less than six months younger. And I see so much of K in myself...
The truth will set you free!!
Exactly Emma,
What I'm saying is that they are virtually the same act - abduction/removal of either a heavily sleeping child or a body.
Lizbe
It could be that the Tapa7 lied about the timeline because they did not check on the children as often as they should have. When they were first interviewed, they probably did not realize the impact that these lies would have in the future.
The crucial difference being that if there was a cover up and removal there are far more windows of opportunity than there are for an abduction.
I don't want for K & G to be complicit in this, I am not anti-McCann (as much as I find them a queer bunch of folk)I am trying to intelligently derive the truth from the information available.
Liz
Karina,
Now we are definately on common ground, this is why I keep returning to the timeline and the simple fact that the way the T9 tell it cannot be true if we are to believe they had no part in foul play.
They cannot have it both ways either thay are lying about their checking routine, and best to own up to that minor crime, or they are complicit in something far more serious.
Liz
Either way, I'm afraid that it leads you to the same initial conclusion that at the very least K & G are lying about their movements that night.
Good morning all (for it is morning in UK), the Daily Express today:
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/po...osts/view/
21908
is emphasising the newly invigorated PJ investigation:
and that;
"They spent almost an hour examining the church where the McCanns spent so much of their time in the weeks after Madeleine’s disappearance.
They paid particular attention to the area outside the chapel, which used to be a cemetery, leading to speculation that they are about to order fresh searches in the area."
So maybe this is a clue about what happened to the body .!?!
I just want to say, although I am a McSceptic and have never warmed to them from the very beginning - I am not certain that they are guilty. What I am looking for is evidence of abduction over and above cuddlecat and JT (seeing someone). Until there is some why should any of us deviate from the PJ position of a) most probable accidental death b) but all lines are still open.
This of course unless you believe that the PJ are corrupt and/or inept and so on.
The 24 horas, this morning:
PJ should wait for the Birmingham’s report
DNA proofs only for next week
The DNA waited tests that may indicate that Maddie was transported dead in the McCann’s car should arrive in Portugal for the beginning of the next week, relates de 24 horas within source from the judicial police.
The final report from the FSS of Birmingham will arrive through diplomatic channels. First it would be sent to the (Portuguese) Foreign office and next to the Ministry of Justice, explained a source with the PJ.
Only after bureaucratic drift, the report would finally arrive in the hands of the judicial. But the PJ has got some results by phone and knows that they confirm the implication of Kate and Gerry McCann in the disappearance of their daughter.
Yesterday, the 24horas was surprised that several British newspapers - Daily telegraph, The Sun, Daily Star and the Evening Standard - published the following inexistent statement of the justice publisher, Luis Fontes: "The story is absolutely true. Our sources are rock solid. If they think they can sue us, bring it on."
This affirmation is completely wrong, because it has never been done.
Regarding the abduction/removal of the body being similar in that time would be needed to do this and we all know that the window of opportunity is small given the constant checks, there is a difference. An abduction introduces another person into the scenario, and this person would have to have been hiding and waiting for the moment to strike. Removal of the body just means that the people already there are the perps and this makes it less easier to spot.
Yes, Maggie. It's also easier for the Tapas9 to hide the body for some time and dispose of it later. In another app, in a suitcase, etc. Then someone could have gone after 4am the following morning when it was still dark and buried it somewhere.
That last comment was from me. I hadn't inserted my name ...
But an abduction by an insider would be equally easy. As I outlined once before, Russel could have taken Maddie out to a waiting car some time between 9.30 and 10, selling her, for example. And only he and Jane were involved, so it's asier to imagine those two keeping it a secret easily.
Martina:
"Russel could have taken Maddie out to a waiting car some time between 9.30 and 10, selling her, for example."
'selling'? how do you mean?
John, child trafficking. Africa is close by where children are sold for slavery.
On Gran Canaria in the past 12 months two children dissappeared without a trace, a girl (teenager I believe, not sure) in 2006, and a boy, Yeremi Vargas, this year. He was snatched when he played on the road with his cousins, a very big risk for whoever took him, but the perp took him anyway.
Police on the island suspect child trafficking or a pedophile ring, but have never found any evidence nor were the children found.
I just can't help it, but children have been snatched from their front garden, with parents in the house, from bedrooms, with parents in the next room, even with siblings in the same room (Polly Klaas).
As long as there is no evidence for Madeleine's death I won't completely rule out abduction.
Maybe next week we will finally know more.
Hi all
I have been following threads on here with interest, but i recently came across a thread on 'Websleuths' that implies syringes were found in the apartment.....
Has anyone else come across this?
Is this were the whole sedation theory is coming from?
Polly Klass's abductor cased the house out for weeks - witnesses remember a stranger in the street. He would have known that there was no father in the house. Also this was a quiet suburb, not a lively resort. He was also seen so there was never any doubt that the child had been abducted. But you are right Martina, abductors do take risks, especially if they are desperate for the money and need to sell the child on. I remember reading on this forum months ago about a child taken in a shopping centre in Teneriffe. A lock down ensued and the child (a girl) was found in the toilets with her hair cut short and wearing boy's clothes. Scary stuff indeed.
macushla - there were reports in the Portuguese press in September or late August that a syringe was found on a stand(?) in the parents bedroom in the apartment. There is a suggestion that this may have been for liquid Calpol (a paracetamol product for children - which can cause drowsiness) administered by mouth rather than for injecting by needle. Gerry has denied using sedatives - but then Calpol is not a sedative as such.
martina - are you seriously suggesting that one of the McCanns friends sold M to traffickers? - I can buy a stranger doing this but not one of their doctor mates.
test
John, I'm suggesting it as a possibility. It would solve some "problems" we have with other scenarios, such as "where is the body?", and "why didn't anyone see a stranger lurking around?", and "why didn't M scream?" And Jane's mystery man whom nobody else saw would then only be a concocted story serving to divert attention.
Is it less likely in your eyes than all 7 of them covering up a death?
Maggie, yes that's a very scary story!
Martina : Well yes it is less likely in my view. The T9 might cover up because of missplaced loyalty or joint guilt of some kind - but to sell each others kids!! my god what kind of people would do that? I don't warm to them but they are not monsters.
Re Martina: As long as there is no evidence for Madeleine's death I won't completely rule out abduction.
I think it's a fact that Madeleine McCann is dead the 3rd of May, and someone has hidden her body.
It's also a fact that the abuduction theory is not consistent.
The death of Madeleine is a truth that hasn’t been proven yet by the material facts. And that's the job of the police to prove it with material evidences, etc. And I am not sure that the Police could prove it rapidly.
Well, how do you know they are not monsters?
Look, I don't believe in this scenario, but it's not impossible.
Actually I don't believe in any of the proposed scenarios, but when I think rationally about the situation several of them might be possible, including monstrous ones.
Police will also think like that. They can not solve a crime if they start with "We don't think that Mr. X is a monster, therefore we won't investigate him".
Martina ; I said its less likely not impossible. I don't think the police will think like this - I think they will treat everyone as a suspect until they are eliminated.
I am following this threat for quite a while, and I found some very well thought theories and interessting speculations. But there is one aspect I am missing and what doesnt get into my head: Lets say, M died by accident - how ever - someone of the T9 who found her, must have returned to the table, saying "Oh, K+G I found your daughter dead!" I cant believe that anyone of the remaining Tapas (including the parents) would keep calm and come up with a plan like the ones we are speculating on. I consider that it takes some time to get along with a situation like this. Plus, it would have been a decision between K+G and not between a group of friends at a restaurant table. When would they ve had the time to sort everything out?
Can anyone follow me?
Re Debbie
I think that scenario is impossible.
In my opinion, Maddie died before the dinner at the Tapas Restaurant.
The Maddie’s corpse should have been in the apartment for a couple of hours because it’s the time necessary for the dogs to detect the sent of death.
Kate gave the alert at 22h00.
If you suppose that the body wasn’t there at that moment, then the death of Maddie should have occured between 18h and 20h. The McCann were at the Restaurant 20h30.
Some people said that the body could have been placed in a suitcase somewhere in the flat. When the cops arrived they didn’t look in the apartment for Maddie. But I think that the person, who hid the body, couldn’t know this fact in advance. That’s why I think that the body has been moved between 20h and 22h.
Jose,
And Gerry was casually chatting with Jeremy Wilkins at 9:15pm as if there was nothing wrong ?
And how could Kate maintain her composure at the dinner table knowing that Madeleine was dead?
I go back and forth between various options but none are satisfactory. It's driving me crazy
Does anyone know if the Ocean Club has a similar system of police back ground checks on creche staff and those working with children.
Is it a british based company?
ok, yes they are a british based company....
but nowhere on their site do they state that they adhere to police background checks on staff who are responsible for looking after children.
it just states they hold professional qualifications...
"And Gerry was casually chatting with Jeremy Wilkins at 9:15pm as if there was nothing wrong ?
And how could Kate maintain her composure at the dinner table knowing that Madeleine was dead?"
These are two of the things I also wonder about. It just doesn't add up. It just seems to me that Kate and Gerry did not know that Madeleine was dead - IF she died that evening.
For this reason I came up with the Russel-did-it angle, because then the behaviour of G+K at the Tapas Bar would make much more sense.
You're right, Karina, no matter how you turn the whole story, something is always amiss and looking wrong. Very weird! But maybe it's like that because we don't have all the facts, and some of the 'facts' are none but just garbled reporting.
Hey, Debbie, welcome! GoLucky, right? 
macushla, you could email them.
When J Wilkins spoke to G McCann he didn't know that anything had taken place (i.e. disposal of a body). He barely knew Gerry and so wouldn't be aware of subtle changes of behaviour. Gerry might well have been delighted to see Jeremy Wilkins because it would give him a cast iron alibi.
Well, not so cast iron, it was only a 10 min chat.
And the time in question are 4 hours.
The friends at the Bar, the waitors, they all saw G+K between 8.30 and 10, but nobody noticed they were upset or had been crying. That is just odd.
But then again, stranger things have happened ... they are doctors after all, used to dealing with death, so might be able to pull themselves together for a while, switch into business mode or something.
True enough Martina, and they have been able to keep themselves totally together even with their daughter missing in the beginning and through all these long months; innocent or guilty is the wonder of it all .
Re Karina
You suppose that Gerry and Kate had a normal behavior and that they were unable to hide their emotions. Well, if it is so, then they simply didn’t know that Maddie was dead. That implies that Kate and Gerry never saw Maddie after she was put to sleep.
"You suppose that Gerry and Kate had a normal behavior and that they were unable to hide their emotions. Well, if it is so, then they simply didn
’t know that Maddie was dead. That implies that Kate and Gerry never saw Maddie after she was put to sleep."
Or that she really was abducted.
Ok, guys, I am leaving for the week-end.
Please have this case solved by Monday morning
K.
We'll do our best, Karina!
Have a nice WE!
Hi Martina and all,
I must admit I was a bit taken aback when I read your theory about RO'B 'selling' M; don't know why I should be when we've gone through just about every other monstrous theory on here from K & J killing M and preserving the body to taking it back to the UK in a suitcase!
I think it's highly likely that Karina will come back to hear that we're no further along.
One thing that did occur to me whilst I was reading through the posts was that I'd always wondered about G talking to JW for 'around 10 minutes or so', they didn't really know each other and G was leaving his friends and wife at the dinner table on what was meant to be their last night to idly chat to a virtual stranger for quite a bit of time standing in the street.
Was he creating an alibi or was this just typical Gerry behaviour? He doesn't strike me as the 'make friends with anyone sort, after all his closest friends are people he's gotten to know over time that he saw every day whilst working with them. Also I found it strange when I heard about the young woman who worked for MW resort that he'd insisted join them when she finished working. I'm sure she had thought it unusual at the time as they hadn't really talked before then but he was so insistent she agreed.
What does everyone else think?
I think he was just being polite to the woman.
And as for JW, maybe he was the one who kept talking, and again Gerry would have been too polite to simply cut it short.
Or ... Gerry kept talking to prevent JW to walk further down the path to the appartments where maybe Russel was just moving Maddie's body?
I think Russel might very well become another arguido, especially if they find out that she really is dead.
I was also thinking ... because we often say that G+K couldn't possibly be so collected and coldly planning how to dispose of the body etc. I thought, maybe it wasn't their idea. Maybe something happened, and they found Madeleine is in serious condition or dying. A fall, or a reaction to the meds or whatever. G+K freak out but being in another country, they turn to their doctor friends first for advice. So one of their friends, maybe Russel or Matt, rushes to help but can't, and she dies. So now he is the one advising them not to make this accident public, they don't know what will happen in this country, how the laws are, how the police will react etc. He advices them to let go of her, put her to rest, and say she's been abducted. He even offers to do that for them. He really thinks it's for the best for everybody. What good would it be to get involved with the portugese police and all? That won't bring her back, it will only lead to more problems. So they agree. They didn't expect it would lead to this mega-media-event, Potugal is not the US, is it? So, they take some valium themselves and sit through the night, and then Kate discovers her gone.
What do you think? I could really believe something like that. Wouldn't surprise me.
Actually don't you think if there is anyone in all this capable of creating an alibi or even two alibis by stiking up conversations it is Gerry? he has kind of 'been in charge' all the time since M went missing. If he was moved by the wish to protect his wife and his family then I think he would be resourceful enough to think of a plan and carry it out. And also persuade Kate to go along with it. Possibly others. Especially if kate was being weak and in shock. I don't have any problem imagining this - provided he had time. If we are talking an hour or half an hour - then no way. But if as has been said M was 2+ hours dead in the apartment then maybe.
But I do have a problem with other people being involved because this begins to stretch credibility too far.
Martina that theory is very plausible in my opinion, it makes sense someone took charge above K&G. I have seen a lot of rational (also a lot of NOT) theories of how this could have occurred plus even in a short time-line. I am not convinced though they were all involved, I am unconvinced of that. At least I hope not, and someone contradicts the time-line (well actually they all haven't told the same story). Regarding your quote "So, they take some valium themselves and sit through the night...remember all the wine in such a short period." I can buy that theory for sure.
A new nanny who looked after M that afternoon has been found:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages...770&
ito=newsnow
its odd that her 'friends' should leak her letters to the Daily Mail but presumably she can confirm that M was in the creche. But why didn't they use her to babysit that night???
Martina, I think that is certainly a very plausible scenario.
It would make it all the more easy to deny sedating, harming, or killing M if it didn't technically happen on their watch.
Then again, I am not convinced that it was terribly hard for them to keep up the charade, knowing the probable consequences for both themselves and other members of their group. Because I think most of us agree that the Tapas group all had at least one dirty little secret - and that was parental negligence at leaving their very young children unattended, reportedly for multiple evenings, and even after being offered babysitting from MW.
The more I think about this, the more I believe that we are missing a key piece of the puzzle - and it may well be known to the PJ (and even the British LE) - and it is just a matter of time until this mystery unravels...
One theory I saw posited on the (sometimes objectionable) Mirror forum is that the accidental death of M may have occured on the night of May 2. I am not saying that I buy that theory, but it illustrates what I mean when I say we are not privy to a key piece of evidence - if M actually died on May 2, it would provide a much looser time line to concoct a ooverup story, figure out what to do with M's body, and rationalize enough (and even possibly confess to a priest) to subside the inevitable guilt.
Guilt that I feel the McCs have suppressed to the point of disbelief. It just does not wash with me that the 2 of them are not at least proclaiming their deep remorse for leaving the children that evening. Yes, they have obliquely acknowledged a sort of mistake, but it certainly does not seem authentic or wholehearted - seems more like a necessary or compulsory statement, rather than the heartfelt, anguished regret one would expect from truly bereft parents.
That being said, I still think that this could all have feasibly happened during the afternoon/evening of May 3 without extending the timeline.
I guess I am just waiting for a leak or another tidbit of "news" that will help me fit this all together in my mind. I think I am close to at least making sense of it all for myself.
Martina,
I think your theory is certainly as good as any other on the 'accidental death' angle. On the Mirror Forum a similar scenario ahs been posted, in addition, much has been made of JTs testimony saying that she was not party to what her partner R'OB was doing and that's why bizarrly she's the only one telling the truth about what she saw when she described a man with a child in a blanket it was R'OB with M. They go on to say that by the time she was asked to help draw an artists impression she did know about his involvement in the cover up hence the 'blank face' and pretty vague decription.
John,
I've read the Nanny's story and I don't like one bit that she's being held up as some kind of witness for G & K. All she is a witness to is looking after the youngsters in the creche and facilitating high tea. What is interesting though is in the early days when G & K were trying to explain why they didn't use the MW babysitting service they said it was because they didn't want to leave the children with 'strangers' and it was this Nanny with whom 'they had a bond' who was on duty!
Liz
Good point Lizbee - I remember the 'we didn't want to leave them with strangers' comment - which I thought was a bit thin at the time.
As regards JT and R O'B - are you really suggesting that JT saw her own partner with M an didn't recognise him? That is stretching credulity a bit. Its possible that JT is thinking she saw something because of her shock - and remembering what she wants to believe. But I don't buy this someone else in charge thing - why on earth would K&G follow someone elses suggestions in this situation.
I totally agree that we are missing the key piece of evidence which will make this all fall into place. We may get a shock!
In addition to lizbee & the nanny from the article link "Intriguingly, Ms Baker revealed to one friend - spoken to by this newspaper - that she told Portuguese police of a man she saw acting strangely near the apartments in the days leading up to Madeleine's disappearance on May 3." She didn't report this? It reminds of Gerry, did he allegedly told relatives and it was reported "we felt we were being watched", may this is where that theory came from as "she is still in contact with Kate McCann" If the above is indeed true, after the alleged abduction did they allow the twins to go to the creche after this, if they believe an abd./pedi was on the loose?
John,
I wasn't necessarily agreeing with the story from the Mirror blog just offering it up for discussion.
I agree with you, G has been 'the man in charge' from the start, it's part of his make-up, his families make-up for that matter. I can't see him surrenduring power to anyone and as that involves knowledge too I'm not sure who he'd want to share dangerous information with.
Dee - they contradicted an earlier video interview where they said that they felt completely safe and that they were not being watched. One of the many about turns in their story.
The bit in the newspaper story about seeing a man acting strangely is probably a Clarence Mitchell 'lets sow the seeds of doubt' tactic.
Absolutely agree there John, if you review the videos and early articles & interviews they have recently contradicted quite a few statements; I'm sure between us we could draw up a fair list of them!
Just a late night comment on nothing much but it is the weekend.
If you were in the McCanns situation (and let us assume for the purpose of this argument) they are innocent and you are offered a large sum of money to hire a spokesman to give your point of view in the most believable manner, the obvious thing, again if you are totally innocent is to employ one who comes from a top class outfit with an untarnished reputation. Why would the McCanns hire an ex government spokesman who worked for the most manipulative, lie telling, story spinning, devious and underhand organisation ever to run the U.K.
Tony Blair and his "spokesmen" turned deceit into an art form. Iraq's weapons of mass destruction ready within 45 minutes, and probably our American friends don't know this but one hour after the 9/11 attack a government "spokesperson" sent out an e mail suggesting and I quote "This would be a good day to bury bad news". That person was dismissed not for the disgusting suggestion but for breaking the 11th commandment "Thou shalt not get caught"
I believe that Clarence was appointed not because he is a solid truth teller, on the contrary he got where he was in government by spinning a series of disasters into New Labour triumphs. I personally thought Auntie Phil was doing a better job than Clarence and she'd have been a lot cheaper!
There's something more that's bothering me about the timeline re: comings and goings to and from the creche over the lunch-time period on 3rd May.
I'm sure K & G initially said that they took the children to the beach for a picnic lunch that day. Then there's 'the last photo' at the side of the pool in the MW resort taken at what time exactly? 1.29pm or 2.29pm? Weren't they supposed to have been back in creche by 2.00pm and hasn't it been established that the position of the sun/shadows cast meant that the photo was taken around 1.00pm?
(An aside here but were G, M and A wearing the same clothes as depicted in the last photo that lunch-time?) They picked the children up at 12.30pm on May 3rd as per creche testimonies. The beach is not that far away but could you really walk down there & lunch with 3 toddlers at the beach then walk back in time to take a super relaxed photo at the MW poolside at 1.29pm? And impossible to have taken it at 1.00pm and have fitted lunch and the beach in.??
Dee -
"Intriguingly, Ms Baker revealed to one friend - spoken to by this newspaper - that she told Portuguese police of a man she saw acting strangely near the apartments in the days leading up to Madeleine's disappearance on May 3." She didn't report this?
If she didn't report it, then what exactly does she told Portuguese police mean?
I have never read in the paper Lizbee " hasn't it been established that the position of the sun/shadows cast meant that the photo was taken around 1.00pm?" Anyone else? I would find that hard to believe that could precisely be determined, one cloud in the way, wouldn't that distort shadows in theory? However, I do remember from reading the PJ had an explanation on the time stamp and it was agreed the time was 1:30 instead of 2:30 as per camera. Anyone remember reading in a paper, what time the kids were officially signed back in after lunch?
DC Why didn't she report it to superiors at that time if she was so suspicious? Why wait until something happens is the point I meant, sorry.
Going back to the time stamp on that last picture & the PJ the time could be reversed...have to try and find a newspaper source to confirm that 1 hour difference and which way that ended up. That is a very interesting point Lizbee and it should be determined. Where is PDG??? Girl, we need your help here!
Just on another note, one of the many reasons I like this place to post opinions is we use the "so called facts" from a newspaper (giving sources) and when discuss theories we call them that. That's the best you can do in this most unusual case.
Dee,
'The last photo' is a blog on the Mirror forum. Some people have taken the time to analyse the photo as they did not beleive it to be genuine. Around the time of this particular blog it had come out that the original published time in all media was that the last photo had been taken at 2.29pm as K & G had always stated, this wasn't questioned for months. However, much later, it transpired that this could not have been the case as the children (certainly Amelie who is featured in the picture) were supposed to have been back at the creche by 2.00pm, G then said that there was a 'fault on the timer' and it was 1.29pm when the photo was taken. The blogger on the Mirror Forum puts some very interesting information forward (which certainly gives food for thought) about the validity of the photo itself. I don't know enough about techie stuff myself but it certainly got me thinking. The stuff about sun rising times and shadows is backed up by links to met sites with the necessary data.
Even apart from the photo I can't see how they did so much with the children in the lunch break. I have twins and an older one and when they were that age I wouldn't have contemplated dragging them around so much if I were going to spend so little of my day with them... but then I certainly don't do parenting McCann style so what do I know?
Liz
If you're looking for this on the mirror forum: go to mirror.co.uk then to forums, then to huntformaddy, then page 5 and open 'The forged last photo', you'll see why it can't simply be cut and pasted or hyperlinked. As usual you don't need to be signed in to view.
re: not leaving the kids with a stranger / bonding with MW nanny...
I believe the newspaper article says that the nanny joined in the search for Maddie around 11pm after finishing her child-minding duties.
My assumption was that she was previously engaged.
Liz - re: "I've read the Nanny's story and I don't like one bit that she's being held up as some kind of witness for G & K. All she is a witness to is looking after the youngsters in the creche and facilitating high tea. What is interesting though is in the early days when G & K were trying to explain why they didn't use the MW babysitting service they said it was because they didn't want to leave the children with 'strangers' and it was this Nanny with whom 'they had a bond' who was on duty!"
My understanding from reading that story was that this nanny joined in the search for M at about 11 pm - after she had completed a child-minding assignment. So, probably she had a previous engagement. Of course, this doesn't mean that they would have hired her in the event that she were available, but it's one explanation about their comments about leaving the kids with a stranger.
...just got caught up on all the super posts - it's ok to be on the fence til you get all those troubling questions cleared up in your mind - I wonder why kate went from anesthesiologist to GP - or was she just a nurse anesthetist - I too remember the lame excuse of not leaving the kids with strangers hence no babysitter -
...Mitchell is getting paid to spin and cause reasonable doubt -I'm sure the McC's are only saying what he tells them to - so if they continually contradict themselves then it is Mitchells fault now -
lizbee -
re: the photo thread on the mirror forum...
Since we've now got a witness who says she saw Madeleine very much alive until 6pm on May 3, theAuthor's entire post is moot.
And on top of that, just on a personal note, theAuthor comes across as a loon with an overly exaggerated sense of self-importance and way too much time on his/her hands.
I just had to add, to everyone here...
Never, ever have I seen such a nest of hysterical mob mentality on the internet such as exists on the forum in question above. Photographers, retouching professionals and graphic artists post their very accurate (to my fellow professional graphic artist's eye) evaluations of the photo (which I again, with my ten+ years of professional experience agree with), and they are either ignored out out-right called incompetent, and then calls are put out for "real" professionals to judge.
Wow. Just... wow. In the past hour that I have spent trudging through less than 1/2 of that one thread, I have come to appreciate this place, and all of you, more than I ever thought possible.
Steve... thank you for giving this to us. And everyone... thank you for being what you all are.
I must admit that the "bloody footprint" news/leak led me to research the running shoes I have seen so often in the picture of K & G jogging together...
I deduced that she is wearing a pair of Saucony and he a pair of Asics, neither of which have a cirle or square pattern. Rather, the Saucony has a distinctive triangular pattern on the outsole, and the Asics an elliptoid shape.
Perhaps I am wrong on the shoe brands, but I was compelled enough to check that out. Why? Because, again, I keep trying to put myself in K's shoes (literally here, I might add!) in order to figure out what really happened to M.
And I wear a size 6, which I think is the most/one of the most common shoe sizes among women. And, just 2 months ago, I broke the metatarsal in my right foot by hefting an enormous suitcase from the trunk of my car - and yep, I did use my left foot as leverage on the back of the car. Granted, I am petite, but I think K falls into that category as well - though it's hard to say, since so little is really "known" about her...
Anyway, I know it's neither here nor there, but that does explain the focus on K by the PJ, if the footprints are really to be believed...
On another note, I am somewhat dismayed by this new piece to the puzzle - which admittedly is still uncorroborated, as are most of the "facts" in this case - because I really did not want to consider that M really was hurt enough to cause blood flow. Until now, I had attributed the blood in the trunk to a thawing, decomposing body leaking out of a suitcase - horrid, yes - but far less horrific than the idea of M being physically abused as well.
Call me crazy, but I am much more comfortable assuming it was an accidental overdose than entertaining the terrible thought that M may have been in pain when she died...
So count me in as one who is waiting to see if these new claims pan out on Monday...
sigh.
Just reading back over a few posts again, and I noticed this.
Maggie - re: the child in the bathroom stall
Are you positive you read that here? I ask only because I've read every post Steve has made since Kelsey Smith disappeared, and because of this.
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/pa...ntal/
kidnap.asp
Hi DC,
Yes I did read it here. It was in the comments section of a much older thread regarding the disappearance of Madeleine. Seems like it's either an apocryphal tale or it happens quite a lot. I've never been on the website you highlighted.
It seems that we are getting some more information (the News of the World) regarding what happened the moment Kate found Madeleine gone. She is reported to have noticed that she knew Madeleine was taken because the shape of her daughter in the bed was still fresh and it looked like she was just taken out of it quite gently. It is also reported that 'friends' believe this information will clear Kate.
What sort of planet are the 'friends' living on?
Just a couple of more things. If all on this forum are confused by the timelines then think how the police investigating the case must feel. For those of us on here who live in Britain, there is a good programme on Channel 4 this Thursday 18/10/07. 'Searching for Madeleine: A Dispatches Special'. A team, including five of the UK's best qualified criminal investigators, one of whom headed the investigation into the Soham murders, travel to PDL to review the investigation. Channel 4 have always reported this case in an objective manner avoiding hype and name calling so it should be worth watching.
I think the reporting on Madeleine's nanny is a bad piece of jounalism. It reads like a cut and paste job. Her testimony is all over the place which suggests to me that she didn't actually speak to the newspapers.
I hold no truck with the 'forged photo' line. It may have been touched up a bit to hide sweat marks but that's about it. The name calling on the Mirror forum is a disgrace and often good points are forgotten. One good thread to read there is the one on the DNA.
The Daily Mail article has the FSS say that apparently the PJ are interpreting the test results wrongly as they are not conclusive. There seems to be not one conclusive result, but still PJ interprets everything as pointing in the direction of accident/murder and hiding of the body.
http://tinyurl.com/2kgpe4
dee, lizbee: hi! my recollection is that although the camera said 2.29 it was actually taken at 1.29.(something about there being no time different between portugal and the UK, also read something about time on camera being an hour out).
I think the creche opens in the afternoon at 2.30pm not 2pm.
Emma- wow! hot sleuthing! checking out the footprints...
I'm a photographer and I'm afraid I didn't agree with theauthors (incredible) research on the photo either.
The imprint of madeleine in the bed? I really cannot see how this backs up the abductor story.
Alot of sloppy reporting from the UK. My journalist friend told me his editor was constantly pressurising him to come up with new stories because the Mccanns thing sells papers(and boosts website traffic too, look at all these threads that steve has had to open, 27,000 comments on the Mirror forum, there are comment sections in france, in spain,everywhere...). Anyway the journalist had no new information half the time so was reduced to dredging up any old thing and trying to make it into a story. Plus to be honest he's rather lazy and none of them are doing any proper investigative reporting (but maybe cos it would damage any prospect of a fair trial?). As he said, he was more interested in his expense account than the nitty gritty of this case.
Also I agree that the name calling on the MIrror forum is awful but some of the posters are absolutely hilarious, so many mad characters!=FACT!
Martina: the footprint has got to be suspect hasn't it. The apartment and the hire car are separated by 25 days - so was someone walking around with blood on their trainers for three and half weeks?
Pdg - the photo - the camera showed 1:29 but was explained as faulty by the McCanns and an hour out (therefore 2:29). There is no time difference between UK and Portugal. theAuthor's analysis is based on the angles of shadows as the sun was at its zenith at 1:29 which is an odd coincidence. However using the angles of shadows cast by gerry's head/neck on his T-shirt seems particularly doubtful cos he could have been leaning forward and so on. I would bet that theAuthor thinks that Princess Diana was shot by the man on the grassy knoll to cover up the faked moon landings.
Chaplins and the church: http://s215.photobucket.com/
al..........church.flv
The narrow alleyway behind the apt: http://s215.photobucket.com/
al..........rtment.flv
more intrepid sleuthing from detective mums, toddler in hand!
john, so the picture was taken later rather than earlier?
The footprint, could it be that the traces of blood only show up under the luminol(?) light only...and this remains even if you wash the visible blood off?
Re the footprint. Not if the trainer was taken off and then stowed later in the car.
Bloody footprint ... it sounds so dramatic. I think Agatha Christie would turn in her grave if she read those media reports.
I don't really buy it. So far only the real trashy papers have reported it, right? Let's wait and see what better ones have to say.
It must have showed under luminol - if it existed at all - I don't think the app wasn't cleaned for weeks?
If it showed under luminol it could have been from anybody, anytime.
Pdg - I suppose the pic is only important if the nanny cannot confirm M was in the crache till 6:00 pm (?). If not then either 1:29 or 2:29 gives the whole afternoon.
This video is interesting (although for some reason recorded from TV) gives you a real sense of the distance from Tapas bar to apartment.
http://s215.photobucket.com/
albu...t=apartment.flv
BTW pdg your links didn't work for me - not sure why.
Wonder if we'll know anything tomorrow? when FSS results are officially there.
Martina:
"I think Agatha Christie would turn in her grave if she read those media reports. "
Shame that the McCanns didn't have a butler - then case would be solved.
Diario de Noticias, Today:
Rebelo enlists 6 new inspectors for the Maddie’s case
The PJ will carry out new searches in Praia da Luz in a 15 km radius zone. The squad of inspectors for the Maddie case, now supervised by Paulo Rebelo and reinforced with 6 elements coming from several central directions, will in the next days perform the searches in an area of 15 kilometers radius from the Ocean Club apartment, where the English child was spending her holidays with her parents and her twin siblings.
Is it the retaking of the work done the days following the disappearance of Maddie? - When the theory of abduction was admitted- some days after the PJ National Director, Alípio Ribeiro, declared that all the lines of inquiry remained open and nothing is conclusive about the disappearance of the British child, occurred the 3rd of May, in Praia da Luz.
An extensive area of forests with spare houses, near the Bravura dam, in Odiáxere, from the Pincho village, north of the county of Lagos, will be of particular interest to the police.
Furthermore, other areas in the south of the Ocean Club, next to the beach in Praia da Luz and Burgau, would be passed to the fine comb by the inspectors, theses places were the McCann couple and the friends did communicate over cell phones during their holidays in the Algarve.
Until now, the new coordinator of the Maddie, Paulo Rebelo who has a workgroup readjusted for this process and composed with more a tenth of inspectors, is reexamining all the details of the action done by his colleagues during the last 5 and half months.
According to the DN, Rebelo want to check a few controversial points that he found in the investigation reports already in his hands. He is a detective “with a lot of experience and he is very meticulous”, guarantees sources within the police. The apartment where Maddie vanished has been reanalyzed, for at least two consecutive [days?], by inspectors, in the beginning of the last week. In the next days, Paulo Rebelo would return there.
"Shame that the McCanns didn't have a butler - then case would be solved."
john: one of the links i provided was the same as yours. sorry you are right about the links not working.
heres the other one: http://s215.photobucket.com/
albu...rent=church.flv
The Sun now explains this:
"Police were told that Kate knew straight away that her daughter had been snatched because the bedclothes were still raised above the mattress as if they were still lying over the four-year-old, the News of the World reports.
Supporters of the McCanns say this meant that she must have been carefully removed from the bed while asleep and taken, rather than just getting up and wandering off, which would have ruffled the bedclothes.
A Portugese police source told the paper: “People keep asking how did Kate know so quickly that Madeleine had been taken and not just walked out.
“But it’s obvious. When she put Maddie to bed the child was all tucked up around the shoulders, and when Kate realised she was gone all the sheets were still neatly in place.
“A child of that age wouldn’t have been able to get out of bed without moving a thing. Someone had clearly been in and carefully lifted her out. Kate realised that right away."
---
Where is the cuddly cat on the shelve statement now? Wasn't that always the reason Kate had known straight away?
I think the Sun writers are having a boring Sunday.
Re Martina
Nothing at all proves that Maddie was alive. If Kate tells the truth, that all means that someone has taken the child and put the bed in order.
That's misinformation.
Re pdg
Try that link:
http://tinyurl.com/332jpt
"In the past hour that I have spent trudging through less than 1/2 of that one thread, I have come to appreciate this place, and all of you, more than I ever thought possible.
Steve... thank you for giving this to us. And everyone... thank you for being what you all are."
I sign this. Well said, DC.
Someone (might even been me!!!) was saying there was little info on Kate - well there is this from Wikipedia (so treat with due care):
"Kate McCann
Kate Marie McCann (née Healy, 1967 in Allerton, Liverpool, England), Madeleine's mother, is a medical general practitioner.
Kate studied medicine at the University of Dundee. Initially she specialised to become a gynaecologist, but later became an anaesthetist. She met her future husband Gerry McCann while employed at the Western Infirmary in Glasgow.They were married in 1998."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Mad...ann#Kate_McCann
Some papers now saying that the UK police are going to interview people who know the McCanns - possibly 100s of people. The only reason I can think of is psychological profiling. If that is important now then could we speculate that they think they have a good case (?).
Pdg - thanks for the church video link. Its quite odd but I feel as if I have been there now. And is Chaplins there close to the church - that's quite a long way from the Ocean Club.
"But I do have a problem with other people being involved because this begins to stretch credibility too far."
John, I'm always a bit surprised when you say that.
Do you find it more believable that only K+G where there when she died and they hid her body and got rid of it (when?) without a car (how?).
I find that not very believable, also because they would have had to be so cool headed and cold hearted in a situation where no parent would be.
It makes more sense, I think, to assume a friend who somehow had a part in the accident, helped them during those 2 or 3 hours with a) the disposal or hiding of the body and b) since he was more able to think clearly (being less involved emotionally) coming up with a cover up story.
"Some papers now saying that the UK police are going to interview people who know the McCanns - possibly 100s of people. The only reason I can think of is psychological profiling. If that is important now then could we speculate that they think they have a good case (?)."
Can't quite follow you there, John. Can you explain? Profiling is more likely done when the police think they have a strong case?
Martina - yes, if you put it that way it does make sense. I suppose my gut reaction is that the more people know then the more likely it is that someone would blab. There have been suggestions that all the Tapas crowd are in on it cos they are swingers or something worse.
I've lead a sheltered life and with Diane Webster there I just think it gets ridiculous - swinging with your mother in law (?) - (well if you met my mother in law you'd think the same ....)
The profiling would be to build up a picture of people who would be capable of acting in a specific way i.e as described by the PJ scenario - and so they most likely have quite a strong scenario.
I think they also wouldn't spend the time, energy & money if they didn't feel they had a very strong case they feel will end up in court.
Re Martina Profiling is more likely done when the police think they have a strong case?
Psychological profiling report has been asked by the PJ to the British police at the beginning of the inquiry, I
’ve seen it in the news of RTP. A criminologist, ex PJ detective was complaining that the British police never provide a report about the McCanns.
I was thinking about the evening Madeleine was 'taken'. I went through the known facts. They are: Madeleine is missing. Gerry was talking to Jeremy Wilkins from 9.05pm to 9.15pm. Madeleine was reported missing by Kate at 10pm it was her first check of the night. Very little is actually known. It's bordering on the ridiculously scant.
One thing is continually grating with me. It is leaving the sliding doors to the apartment unlocked. Kate said in an interview for Women's Hour, BBC Radio 4 that PDL was a very relaxing, happy place they had no reason to believe the kids were in danger which is why she and G left them alone. She also mentioned that constant checks were being made. But I still think you wouldn't leave a door unlocked if you had valuables such as passports, money and jewelry. Therefore I believe that all doors to the apartment was locked - Kate also said Madeleine wouldn't have wondered off. This suggests to me that the doors were locked. I think that the time crucial for this investigation is 7.00pm to 8.30pm.
Another thing that I find funny is that while the men made cursory checks, i.e. listening and not disturbing the children, Kate went to the bedroom. Now why would she do this? Was there something in the main living area that alerted her such as blood that prompted a more detailed check?
Naah, I can't get my mind around the swinger bit either.
And I don't believe all 9 are 'in it'. But IF one or two of them helped G+K, do you think they would talk about it with the other 5?
I know a group of friends in my hometown, they are very very close knit, go on holidays together, live together. Outsiders have a hard time getting into the 'inner circle' of that strange group. I could imagine them keeping things strictly to themselves. But don't know if the Tapas 9 were like that.
Where did you find the bit about police going to interview other friends and acquaintances? Can't find anything.
The daliy star: http://tinyurl.com/yvbek4
THE body of missing Madeleine McCann could lie by the church where her parents prayed for her safe return.
Investigators were last night planning to dig outside Our Lady of Light chapel in Praia da Luz.
They spent part of yesterday examining a grassy knoll on the hillside site that was the resort's cemetery before a new one was opened nearby.
http://tinyurl.com/yvbek4
"Investigators were last night planning to dig outside Our Lady of Light chapel in Praia da Luz.
They spent part of yesterday examining a grassy knoll on the hillside site that was the resort
’s cemetery before a new one was opened nearby."
The truth at last! They buried her on a grassy knoll... so it has to be a conspiracy. The CIA had her killed by Frank Sinatra's ghost to hide the fact that her mother was having an affair with Elvis...
...
What?
I read somewhere "every good conspiracy theory needs a grass knoll".
Martina:
Police to quiz people -
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman...m?
id=1641422007
Daily Mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages...ge_id=1770&
ct=5
A bloody footprint was found in Kate and Gerry McCann's apartment, matching a print on their hire car, according to a forensic report shown to The Mail on Sunday.
The People:
http://www.people.co.uk/news/tm_...-
name_page.html
MADDIE COPS: SHE WAS THROWN OFF BOAT
EXCLUSIVE Testimony of nanny Charlotte is 'credible' Mystery suspect was wearing fluorescent top MADELEINE: POLICE PREDICT A BREAKTHROUGH
What is a knoll? Somehow it brings indecent images to mind ...
Thanks John!
If I was going to dispose of a body at sea I would definitely wear a floursecent jacket - this would provide maximum visibility should there be a nanny standing on the shore looking out over the water. Having first left a clear trail of bloody footprints to mark out my route of course.
From Jose's link - thanks by the way.
"New tests carried out at the Forensic Science Service laboratory in Birmingham show there is a 'moderate' chance that the blood belonged to Madeleine. But the results are inconclusive. What they believe is significant about the footprint is that no traces of blood were found around it."
Hhhmmm it will be interesting to see if more blood was found in the apt. Wonder if Kate's new version of the bedding being straightened is to set-up a theory the abductor also cleaned up any blood? If so that's what I call ludicrous; places c.cat on shelf, straightens bed, cleans up blood!
Martina:
"What is a knoll? Somehow it brings indecent images to mind ..."
That speaks volumes about your mind! Its a small hill mound or hillock.
Re Martina
knoll: a small round hill
So this Sunday evening are we all suitably confused at what the heck is going on? Do any of us harbour doubts? Grassy knoll. I'm indignant - you couldn't make it up. I've seen images of PDL from the air and there are NO Grassy Knolls.
I dare say the forensics will bring even more confusion. I was at the end of my tether with this BUT John you saved me with your post on the flourescent jacket. Priceless.
Now don't get me started on 'hillock'!
Sorry, I'm feeling silly today ...
Maggie I say even if the case will be 'solved' one day we will still be confused and bewildered and walk around day and night wondering, pondering ...
If only the PJ had bungled the initial investigation so much.
From google maps, you will see in the center a hill with a road in spiral, I think that s the knoll they are talking about in the article:
http://tinyurl.com/3bxqho
The police are guessing more than us, honestly they need to perhaps take a step back and think before theory number 100 arrives.
Yes Jose it's a hill (grassy knoll? - no and this word has associations with conspiracy theories) but why would they go there? Surely there would be evidence of disturbance?
Sorry Martina I don't concur with your surmation of the PJ. Their only mistake was to believe the parents in the first place. Searches were made. But lets be honest. If they had treated the apartment as a crime scene and the parents as suspects from the start.......who knows. I think they are doing a good job. There isn't a police force in the world that can stand up to such scrutiny.
"If they had treated the apartment as a crime scene"
That's what I meant. It was most crucial in this case. Had they done this, whether it would implicate the parents or not, it would likely have long ago lead to a clearer picture.
I wondered when a 'grassy knoll' would enter the frame. Unbelievable!
Re: Mirror Forum. Yes it's as mad as a box of frogs in there and occasionally a bit scary, I dip in from time to time to see if they have any interesting new leads and there are a couple of interesting threads but I wouldn't find it good for my mental health to stay in there for any length of time.
My concern about the photo was again about timing and whether anything was tampered with to provide an alibi of being at the MW poolside for some, as yet unknown, reason. As John pointed out above there are still some questions about that.
Liz
New extensive searches to be done in a 10 mile area aorund PDL.
Interestingly it says
"Portuguese detectives are concerned that the inquiry has failed to rule out the possibility that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger."
http://tinyurl.com/ywg5yq
So are you saying the PJ are a bunch of hillocks?
Re: The 'Walk up the lane from the appt.' video.
I thought I'd seen all of Ellibean's vids but I hadn't seen this one. It's very interesting as I had no idea that the back of the Tapas Bar backed onto the lane. Yes there's a wall and a bush there but would it have been possible for someone to get over those and to the side entrance of the appt. quickly and without being seen?
The PJs early investigations deserve a kick up their grassy knolls.
Sorry coulnd't resist that.
Liz
Lizbee thanks for the tip on the DNA forum site, it was very, very good. I tried to find it today, but couldn't. Luckily I copied the best part to send to a friend. I hope & trust this person with DNA experience will come back this week and analyze any new info. and also that site reappears so I for, one won't have to wade through the slop and trash.
Yes Steve, thank you for this site. Also the only time I get some pop-ups is from certain newspaper sites only, not here. I am also using firefox.
"So are you saying the PJ are a bunch of hillocks?"
lmao!
Hillocks, grassy knobs ... soming like that.
Seriously, what did Amaral do? Maybe it's easier to say what he didn't do:
he didn't secure the crime scene and items such as cuddly cat
he didn't then rule out everyone who had trampled the crime scene by taking a DNA sample
he didn't impound the car
he didn't impound all the shoes of everybody to match the footprint
he didn't search all these places he said he would have searched (what will hopefully be done now)
he didn't search the villa where they stayed later
and so on
:roll eyes:
This links to a perfect example of why I think this entire thing, no matter what your opinion on guilt or innocence, has become almost farcical (and yes, people other than the McCanns do use that word).
http://tinyurl.com/ysv7pl
All in one day of headlines, the PJ are apparently simultaneously convinced that the case will be solved by mysterious bloody footprints (which, cannot possibly have been left in two places 25 days apart and which are reported to have only a "moderate" chance of being Madeleine's) and that her body was dumped at sea on May 5.
And looking at that site's tagline, "Keeping tabs on the tabloids" - these are headlines from The Mirror, News of the World (which bears a disclaimer inside that the majority of their content is made up on the spot and is for entertainment purposes only), The Times, The Mail, The People, and The Observer.
Have we gotten any "news" from any other British papers, aside from The Telegraph? Is there such a thing (and I ask this in all seriousness, because I honestly don't know) as a non-tabloid newspaper in the UK?
Because if all of these are considered tabloids, then about 95% of the stories we've been reading have the very real possibility of being absolute bunk.
Martina,
Steady. If truth be told, the apartment had already been trampled over by the the time the PJ had arrived, by a bunch of medics who ought to have known better. My point really was that I suspect the PJ were too deferential to the intimidating English tourists who were insisting the police launch a nationwide search and close the borders. Out of frustration that not enough was being done, the parents and friends then contacted Sky News, catapulting the affair into global phenomenon that it has now become.
DC me...thinks C.M. was busy this weekend with smoke & mirrors again, trying to confuse, so when the hopefully "real" results come in, nobody will believe the press. The footprint especially seems to have his mark on it. There is no way the Daily whoever got this test leaked to them, this has to be old info. that was never leaked because it was deemed insignificant. Why now, because the McSpins want you to believe it's new and if that's the best of the tests maybe you won't bother reading next week in my opinion.
Hey you lot I do the funnies and irony on this thread! Butlers, grassy knolls and this from Maggie:
"Kate also said Madeleine wouldn't have wondered off. This suggests to me that the doors were locked. I think that the time crucial for this investigation is 7.00pm to 8.30pm. Another thing that I find funny is that while the men made cursory checks, i.e. listening and not disturbing the children, Kate went to the bedroom. Now why would she do this? Was there something in the main living area that alerted her such as blood that prompted a more detailed check?"
I wandered at first why M wondered off then realised I had done the same, but as for why Kate went into the bedroom, you have obviously forgotten Gerry's new testimony. After a "cursory check" of the children he obviously went back to the restaurant and said to his wife "I had a funny feeling that there may have been an abductor in our children's room when I checked it just now, when you go up there in half an hours time you had better have a good look around."
There you go Maggie see when you put all the evidence together in a logical manner it is self-explanatory.
Stanley
When I saw my mistake I was going to repost but decided not to. I just knew some smart ass pedant would point that out . Thank you for making me smile. Of course when you put the evidence together it's self-explanatory.
Maggie, please, don't 'steady' me. I believe, and please no offence, that you are wearing pink shades when it comes to the work of the PJ, which leaves much to ask for.
And in case somebody feels to jump up here and say, but hey, they aren't any better in the UK/US/anywhere else, yes, most likely true, but then also we feel it's our right to criticise the British, American or German police, so why not the Portugese PJ? I don't see the reason at all why they should be forgiven their mistakes.
DC, I agree with you, I had similar doubts about the footprint story, and you might well be right.
But just in case they are correct and to avoid further confusion: as far I understood the report it says that a bloody print was found in the apartment and another one which was NOT bloody but from the same shoe was on the boot of the trunk.
NOTE FROM STEVE:
I really don't like doing this, but I'm posting in these comments in particular to let folks know that if you've ever considered making a donation to help The True Crime Weblog out, now would be a very good time. Just go to the main page of the blog and click the PayPal donation button on the top left-hand side of the page. Any amount would be helpful.
No matter what, thank you all for being here and in this discussion in particular, the considered and intelligent nature of your posts.
Steve
Martina,
No offence meant and no offence taken.
I'm not wearing rose tinted glasses. I like to look at all angles in this case. Mistakes have been made on both sides. I have never known a crime where this didn't happen.
DC: lol.
The tabloids are: the Daily Mirror(left wing), The sun (right wing), The star (a bit like the National Enquirer but more breasts).
Mid range tabloids are: The Daily Mail (uber right wing), The daily Express.(right wing)
The broadsheets are: (although some of the are now in tabloid format): The times,The Daily Telegraph, Financial Times (right wing), The Guardian (left wing), The independant (neutral)
But tabloids in the UK are not just trash, they also have serious articles and issues. Journalism in the UK is alot more feisty than in the US. Less reverant.
They have quite alot of power, think about it, 10 daily national newspapers!
Just to continue: Sunday papers:
Tabloids: (also known as Red tops because their name is usually in red):News of the World (known as News of the Screws)(sister paper of The Sun), The People, Sunday Mirror.
MId range tabloids:The Sunday Express, The Mail on Sunday.
Broadsheets: The Observor, The Sunday Times, The Sunday Telegraph.
And of course hundreds of local newspapers.
We are a newspaper reading nation par excellence.
As for portuguese police. I think it was Carlos who said that the Portuguese police got off to the wrong start because they were being polite to the Mccanns as visitors. I think they were wrong footed also by the massive media attention talking about an abduction.
What else to add about our illustrious neswpapers; well they are UK based so 99.9% of the people reading them know what they are getting wehther it be on page 3 or in the sports section or god forbid the pages with words on in between. The people who want news do know that there's the spin on it (apart from the tiny % of the population that can't spell spin and who would be having the newspaper read to them by someone else anyway).
Anyone deadly serious about news gets a Broadsheet: Guardian (favoured), Independant, Observor (all v. good for crosswords too!).
I have a hate, hate, laugh ourageously, hate, love, hate, laugh, hate, relationship with the redtops; mostly I hate them, now and again they make me laugh and on a couple of occasions in my lifetime I've loved them for doing something extra (like the Mirror's Pride of GB Awards which really are something else).
On a more 'on focus' topic I now doubt new proveable DNA type evidence will emmerge, other than an actual body. There can't be any that hasn't disintegrated to the point os non-establishment of true ownership surely?
Anyone else with suggestions as to how this will pan out?
Liz
liz and pdg -
Thanks so much for the heads-up on the papers in the UK. I know it's rather easy to spot a US tabloid - if you can buy it on the right-hand side of the checkout lane at Wal-Mart, it's a tabloid - but I've got no experience with UK tabloids other than News of the World. I loves me some BatBoy, I do. :D
On the DNA...
I'll admit that I'm far from an expert, because I'm under no illusions that having a crush on Nick Stokes equates to any kind of actual knowledge about what real forensic scientists actually do, but to my mind it would seem that any DNA they would collect at any scene now would be far too old to get anything definitive from. But the amount of cold cases that have been solved decades after the fact based on DNA and other forensics tests leads me to believe that evidence that was collected immediately, if stored and preserved correctly, can continue to yield definitive results years and years later.
One has to wonder, though, with all the testing that's been done in Birmingham these past few months... what would be the point of new tests on the original evidence? Surely there can't be any tests they haven't run.
Exactly DC, that was my point.
Surely they've scrutinised what they have to death by now. And stuff collected at this late date... well how 'evidential' could that be proved to be i.e.hold up in a court of law especially with the calibre of lawyers likely to be involved.
Without M (one way or the other) I don't believe there's enough to go on for us, a jury or anyone. It saddens me because the whole world now needs some kind of closure (undeniably a happy one is what we'd all hope and pray for) but somehow I don't think we're going to get it.
My heart does truly go out to the family, because whatever came to pass I believe they loved and only wanted the best for her and them.
Liz
lizbee -
100% agreement on your last statement.
One of the things that has amazed me about this entire thing is the sheer number of "perfect" parents there seem to be in the world. Entire forums seem to be populated by nothing but, in fact.
Because the amount of sheer venom being thrown at them, every single word, every expression, every gesture, everything they've ever done or been alleged to do... to some people, it's all just proof that they're horrible, terrible parents who obviously don't love their children and should have the two they have remaining taken away.
I've got four kids, ranging in age from five to fourteen. My three youngest are are only nineteen and fifteen months apart, respectively. So I've been where the McCanns are now, with three children three and under. I have no problem believing that there are perfectly innocent explanations for all the things they've been vilified for, because I've been there and done that myself already.
Have I ever given one of my children a dose of Tylenol because they're so overtired they can't sleep and they're miserable? I'd be lying if I said no. Have I ever lost my temper with any of them? Of course I have - I'm human. Have I ever thrown my hands up in surrender because one or more of them is just too much to handle? On more than one occasion.
None of that means I don't love them, or don't want them, or don't deserve them. What it means is that I'm human, not superwoman. But if anything ever happened to one of them, and if it became a worldwide spectacle like this case has... there'd be a thousand "perfect" mothers at my door the next day, screaming what an unfit mother I am, declaring that I should be robbed of the children I have left, and even daring to claim (and this ticks me off to no end about a large number of regular posters to certain forums) that they love my children far more than I ever could and they'll go to the ends of the Earth to prove it (all without ever leaving the comfort of their own keyboards).
Yes, they made mistakes - some that I've made myself - but of course they love their daughter. Whatever happened to her, no, I don't doubt that it never occurred to them that it would happen, whatever "it" is. But they're human, and humans are nothing if not imperfect, no matter what some people might claim.
The 24Horas quotes the British press, this morning:
Part of the forensic report revealed by British newspapers
Same marks in house and car
An astonishing revelation could be reported in the forensic report of Birmingham, which should arrive this week in Portugal: a bloody footprint, found in the McCann’s apartment, has been analyzed by the experts.
These right footwear mark, size 5 or 6, is coinciding with another one found in the rear bumper of the car rented by the McCanns, according to the news reported yesterday in the British newspaper “The Mail on Sunday”.
The mark in the car could indicate that someone has carried the body out of the car’s trunk.
May be it’s the conviction of the judicial police, according to the British newspaper, and may be it’s that proof that drew the McCanns to the center of suspicion in the disappearance of their daughter.
No trace of blood has been found the footprint detected in the car.
But the blood in the footprint found in the apartment has been tested for DNA. The results conclude that it matches with Maddie’s blood in a moderate scale.
That means that that’s not a conclusive proof.
The scales used in the laboratory are rated with the following levels: no scientific evidence, limited, moderate, moderately strong, strong, very strong, extremely strong and conclusive.
'It is quite possible, therefore, that the blood had been picked up on the sole of the shoe from outside the apartment’ reports a source close the investigation to the “The Mail on Sunday”.
The proof could be inconclusive.
Steve
Sorry to raise such a mundane matter on this thread, but Pay Pal will not allow me to pay without telling them what state I live in and my ZIP code, and despite many people here believing the U.K. is the 51st state it will not work can you advise?
Correio da Manhă headlines this morning:
148 computers inspected
Hundreds of children’s faces were downloaded from paedophile sites, but the judicial experts used software specialized in recognition of blond Childs, with ages and characteristics similar to Maddie, in another research for the English child. 148 computers, apprehended Tuesday in all the country, were passed to the fine comb - and, as usual, nothing has been found.
Steve,
I am having trouble with this site now - have you changed something? Firefox is tryng to downoad something from www.gravatar / ec1.images-amazon.com, have tried Safari (I'm on a Mac) and that doesn't complete download either.
Cheers.
DC
Well said... I to too am no 'super' mother, and i doubt if KM is either.
With 3 children under 4, and 20 mths between them, it could be very possible that KM may have suffered/be suffering Post Natal Depression, Its only an opinion.
It may explain why she seems detatched, almost bemused. It may explain why she seems to heavily rely on GM, ( she always seems to be looking to him for 'support' in the photos i have seen of them together)
And the running... who goes out running within days of your daughter going missing?
well its a know fact that excersice can combat the effects of depression.
So maybe the theory of an 'accident' can be held up, maybe she was at the 'end of her tether' an accident happened, Madeleine was hurt.
There are theories around that Madeleine fell and broke her neck and that CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) was recovered, which is why the portugese police are sure Madeleine is dead.
A leak of CSF can occur following a head, neck or spinal injury.
No-one is a super, yummy mummy (hate that phrase). I myself had two little girls under the age of 3 and it was tough and even though I have a six year age gap with the third it's tougher still. Worse are mums who cope without any help or support from their spouse. Thankfully I did have all the help I needed but some are not so lucky and I have great sympathy for women who struggle (I knew a few and their life was and still is swamped). Anyone can have an accident with a child but I don't condone leaving very young children alone in a holiday apartment, no matter how often the checks.
Macushla, I've not read about the CSF fluid being found but the PJ do seem certain that Madeleine is dead, and who knows what evidence they have. It's all very sad.
Steve please let us in the UK know how to contribut with PayPal.
An interesting article 15th October:
http://tinyurl.com/2hs3fx
John (UK) I also use Safari on a Mac and have no problems with the thread other than trying to pay for it! (see my entry 3:40am) anyone else in Uk have this problem?
Jose (FR) - thanks for that link.
The article is one of those rather spooky responses to discussions on here and other places that very little is known about Kate and also peoples comments that she comes across very cold.
I agree with the comments above about the realities of bringing up children. I think that good parents do loose their temper, get exasperated and so on - and I am sure many people conveniently forget their own shortcomings when criticising others.
Stanley - do you get a graphic ont he far right against each entry - cos this seems to be the problem - non of my browsers will download it. But everything elase works so no real problem.
I don't get a graphic, but some post have the word "Gravatar" written in the upper right corner.
Continuing the article from the Correio da Manhă:
The theory of death in the apartment in Praia da Luz is maintained as the top priorities for the PJ, whose team of Portimăo has been reinforced with six experienced inspectors - four of them in the violent crimes. But off course, all the lines “remains open” in the inquiry phase, as reported by the National Director of the PJ Alípio Ribeiro.
The CM knows that the operation ‘predator’ was planned more than six months ago. It was carried out with the help of Interpol, and it has nothing to do with the Maddie case. But since 148 computers in all the country were apprehended, with 80 potential sexual predators, the search for the English girl among hundreds of videos and pictures files was a ‘logical consequence’.
The aim was to find children with almost the same age and physionomic traits similar to those of Maddie - but, among hundreds of picture, the CM knows that none of the victims was the English child vanished the 3rd of May.
Almost all the children used in the internet by the pedophile rings have their face’s picture altered digitally, according to our sources, as for the aggressors. It was the case of the alien paedophile whose face picture has been put in circulation by Interpol last week, but the authorities didn’t were able to find the genuine picture- with the help of software equipment allowing to reproduce the modified face.
Marks Bloody nonsense
A mark with bloody vestiges was supposed to have been found in the exit of the apartment where Madeleine was sleeping, reports the ‘Mail on Sunday’, but the CM confirms that is not true. The tabloid says that the partial footwear mark is believed to be from a size 5 or 6 but sources within the investigation reports that’s ‘irrelevant news’.
The PJ was in the apartment within the Ocean Club in two different phases of the investigation - first in May and next in the end of July and August - and at any moments it has been detected by the experts any mark of an adult with vestiges.
Anyway, says the newspaper that “are two evidences’ - the second one is a vestige found in the car - that justified the naming of the McCanns as official suspect. ‘The existence of the two marks, which has never been revealed until [yesterday], is apparently at the heart of renewed suspicion that the couple were involved in their daughter's disappearance.
‘New tests carried out at the Forensic Science Service laboratory in Birmingham show there is a 'moderate' chance that the blood belonged to Madeleine. But the results are inconclusive.’
It’s in the same day that the News of the World found a theory explaining why Kate was shutting that they have taken their daughter: ‘the imprint of the youngster left in the unruffled bed sheets’ and the mother notice these changes.
Babysitter in Greece
Catriona Baker was a babysitter of the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz and she is one the last persons to have seen Maddie alive, the afternoon of the
Stanley and John,
Snap! I use safari on Mac too. Ha. Sometimes I get a small blue square with a ? in the centre. But that's all.
Steve, Can't give you money as I don't have a PayPal account and Stanley is right, I can't register on this as it's insisting on a zip code and state name (abrev) which I can't supply:-(. My partner has a PayPal account he uses with Ebay. Would I be able to donate using his account? I am techno phobic hence the denseness.
Babysitter in Greece
Catriona Baker was a babysitter of the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz and she is one the last persons to have seen Maddie alive, the afternoon of the 3rd of May - before to be sent, in 24 hours by Mark Warner (head of the tourist resort) to a Greek resort of San Agostino’, reports the ‘Mail on Sunday’. The newspaper reports that the 20 years old girl ‘may be a key witness in the defense of the couple’, after having been interrogate by the police - but meanwhile Her present ‘location is being withheld on the request of the McCanns’
[…]
New team already working on the ground
The Paulo Rebelo team is already working at 100% in Portimăo, reports the CM, after the chief-inspector and six inspectors chosen by the new head of the investigation arrived in the Algarve. Officially, all the lines are open until the end of the inquiry - this is why the elements of the Central Division of high-tech Criminology Investigation, responsible for the operation ‘predator’, searched for pictures of Maddie in 148 computers apprehended - but it’s the experience of the chief-inspector in the homicide division, in Lisbon, that is already trying to reconstruct the puzzle of the investigation. They are already in Portimăo one inspector of the Homicide Division another working in the sexual offense, an inspector linked to the investigation of robbery - and two other experts in technical analysis. Those elements don’t substitute the present team that is already involved in the inquiry, and, with the expected arrival of the tests of the laboratory this week, they are also going to participate in the next steps of the inquiry
Software identifies modified pictures
An alien paedophile appears with children in dozens of pictures intercepted by Interpol but has never been caught. The authorities were able to identify his face - the predator was hiding his face behind an altered picture with a swirl pattern. The experts were able to produce identifiable pictures, concealing the effect of the image in a way to revert the swirl in the face. Days after, the PJ arrive with 80 portential paedophiles, in ‘preventive (action). The aim was to alert the population for the fact that, in the new (Portuguese) Penal Code, the possession of cartoons with pictures of children in sexual acts is a crime’, claimed a judicial source.
I still cannot believe the parents have done anything to little Madeleine, except of course leave her alone in their apartment.
MY heart goes out to them, it is such a devastating time and to have all these allegations etc flying around isnt helping anyone.
Lynn - your compassion is a credit to you. But don't you have any doubts?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/...5/
nmaddy115.xml
"Meanwhile the McCanns were said to be "emotionally torn" to learn that Portugal's biggest ever anti-paedophile operation has failed to turn up a single lead in the hunt for their four-year-old daughter, who went missing during a family holiday on May 3."
"The McCanns were said by friends to have hoped the raids would turn up "vital leads" that could help find Madeleine and suggested the shift of the investigation had moved away from the theory that they somehow harmed her."
"A friend of the McCanns, both 39-year-old doctors from Rothley in Leicestershire, said: "They're torn between huge relief that she's not be found to be in the clutches of a paedophile ring and dismay that the investigation has hit yet another brick wall."
SAY WHAT???? But at the very least, "They continue to hope and pray that Madeleine will be found alive and well."
Hi everybody. I was gone this week-end and I just reviewed all the posts and links.
Can someone tell me the status of the following leaks? Have they been discredited or we still don't know if they are real?
1. More than 3 children in the room ?
2. Is Gerry NOT the biological father ?
3. The shoe print in the room and in the rental car?
I can't quite figure out if these leaks were invented by the tabloids or if there is some truth to them.
thank you
Re Karina
1. More than 3 children in the room?
Nothing is really proven.
2. Is Gerry NOT the biological father?
The 24Horas send an email to Clarence Mitchell with 9 questions: In one question they ask if Gerry has a certificate of DNA Paternity test.
At this moment, there is no proof that is or isn't the biological father.
3. The shoe print in the room and in the rental car?
The Correio da Manhă reports today that this information is irrelevant.
steve, i'm on a mac too and use safari. no probs with your site (but no numbers on posts and wierd little question marks in black diamonds instead of some punctuation or letters with accents).
Tried to give a small donation with paypal but it didnt work either!
Wierd how we are all on macs...great minds think alike and all that!
I get blue squares with ? marks in them on the far right. Well its a privilege to be amongst so many Mac users! I don't think my ISP server can access the gravatar site - which I gather is something to do with downloadable avatars. (...whatever!)
Has anyone any information on these two specialist policement that the PJ have called in - they are called "the cleaners". They sound cool.
Dee,
I'm begining to think that this friend of the McCanns doesn't have a way with words. Quite chilling and most unsavoury. You couldn't possibly be dismayed at the news that your daughter isn't in the hands of a paedophile ring (okay they are dismayed the investigation has hit a brick wall but in my book it's the same thing. I know we don't understand really what a person goes through when their child goes missing but surely this news would be greeted with unadulterated joy and not huge relief. They need to find a different friend/spokesperson or else this newspaper report is made up. It's all getting quite gruesome.
I am still reeling over these friend/s quotes on how the family feels, I am absolutely shocked as I thought we had kind of heard it all, but "The McCanns were said by friends to have hoped the raids would turn up "vital leads" that could help find Madeleine and suggested the shift of the investigation had moved away from the theory that they somehow harmed her."
Gerry's blog of this date keeps ringing in my mind as they felt the PJ were not thorough and not doing enough:
Day 55 - 27/06/2007
Kate and I would like to emphasise that if anyone who thinks they have information relevant to Madeleine’s abduction, then please pass this on to your local police. It does not help us to receive such information directly- we will only pass it on to the police for it to be considered in context of the overall investigation. If people are unhappy to speak to the police directly information can be given to the international crimestoppers anonymously." Why would they not welcome tips going directly to them, especially since they hired their own P.I. firm early on although they can't investigate in Portg. they were coming in from other places.
Paedophile pictures go all over the world incoming & outgoing. These creeps feed of each other. It is huge news nothing of Maddy was found on these computers...I would be jumping for joy, crying happy tears/doing the happy dance and would be the best day in a very long time. It would take me awhile to come down off that high, chances that my 4 yr. old daughter was NOT with a Ped. Go back to the statement, "They're torn between huge relief that she's not be found to be in the clutches of a paedophile ring and dismay that the investigation has hit yet another brick wall." What would the investigation has hit another brick wall refer too? Who is left having a possible abductor profite? I can only think of ransom, trade, someone wanting a child. I find it odd, maybe someone has some ideas?
Just read you comment Maggie and I agree.
Very unfortunate turn of phrase: " If she's dead, she's dead". It sounds so matter of fact. "Its not by their hand"- this really does sound like the most important thing.
And maybe, if guilty, we have just heard, voiced aloud, the thinking behind the cover up... " if she's dead, she's dead." What's done is done. Why lose everything? The dead...they are in the past, let's look out for the living.
The comment in Gerry's blog makes sense if you suppose that they know exactly what happened to Madeleine. Therefore any "leads" are:
a) a waste of time for them to look at
b) best given directly to the police to further divert them from looking at the parents role/culpability
c) a horrible reminder of what happened and would require further lies (hole digging) on their part
Hi All,
Re: wording and phrases used by G especially and 'friends and family':
I think that some people do say very unexpected things, use phrases and wording that don't seem appropriate to the occasion; usually these people would do this in the normal state of affairs anyway. IMO People behave in character whether they are grieving or going through any emotional upheaval. So although I personally have found some very strange statements (particularly by Gerry) whilst my interest has been piqued by this case I think it would be wrong to read far too much into these.
This was brought home to me recently when my (step) neice tragically died. No-one knew what to say and some people said some clumsy things but the worst culprit for 'wrong-wording' was her massively greiving Dad who managed to quietly shock a couple of people until it was pointed out that he never had been Shakespeare, why should this event change him. But because everyone else was carefully watching their words and the attention was focused on him and my sister his 'wrong-wording and poor phraseology' was suddenly more obvious.
Liz
Gerry's blog, bothered me; could they be that busy to send on leads? If you have TOTAL confidence in the police maybe that would be best, save possibly an hour or two on a lead...but if you DON'T, you would want tips for your own P.I. firm. Thanks PDG for your insights; a) stood out, b) & c) didn't occur to me and I think you nailed it.
Liz I am so very sorry about your neice. I can understand people want to comfort and they don't know what to say. I can also understand "black humour" and how someone can take offense although it can be the person's way of coping and they clearly did dearly loved the person. It can't be easy for you dealing with two tragedies either, I am so sorry for your loss.
This case doesn't seem quite the same, as Madeline is only missing.
I think Maggie is right on "They need to find a different friend/spokesperson or else this newspaper report is made up. It's all getting quite gruesome." The words being publicly made seem aimed at self-preservation of the living and forgetting the little girl lost, maybe that's the difference here?
Dee,
Thanks for your concern and kind words. It's still a bit unreal tbh. She was only 17 and accepted a lift from a driver who'd been drinking so it's going to court, happened on 21st Sept just gone and we buried her a week later.
Whole (huge extended) family still in bits... mpb (my point being)you never know what you're going to say, how you're going to act until some huge emotional trauma comes banging your door down and you find you haven't got the right words, there is no script. And yet everyone is in tenterhooks as to how to behave and talk apart from those who are so consumed by it all not to care.
I know this case is nowhere similar but I do think that any severe emotional stress draws from the same bank within us and let's face it whatever happened to M they (K & G)don't have their daughter any more. The end point is the same even if the journey there was different and after all this time (& yes I do know of the rare miraculous return of children in abduction cases and abduction is still a possibility!) I think it's sadly highly doubtful M is alive.
You are quite right it is possible that G is giving us clues of his actual knowledge of exactly what happened but it's also possible that he is trying to come to terms with everything so far and future ramifications and finally absorbing the fact that he failed in his parental responsibilities.
As ever I'm open to all the strange possibilites... it's a real baffler.
Liz
I'm (again, like there's any real surprise here) not the least bit off-put or upset or shocked by their reaction.
To innocent parents looking for any hope they can find that their daughter is still alive, her picture being found would have been both a blessing and a curse. The blessing would have been having tangible proof that she might still be alive; the curse, of course, would be knowing what she was living through.
Of course they don't *want* her to be in the hands of a pedophile. Of course they don't want her to be harmed in any way. But if the only alternative to her being injured is her being dead, of *course* they're going to hope for the lesser of the two evils.
Just testing
http://www.thumbsnap.com/v/a6RDuYjT.jpg
0
how do you upload a photo?
Just one comment, DC: Do you really perceive the "lesser of two evils" to be death - rather than abuse by a pedophile for the past 5 months???
I'm sorry to have to physically write this, but I would like to think that as a parent of girls, the "lesser of two evils" to me would actually mean death - and I find that very hard to even type - rather than the alternative of having one of my beautiful, young, carefree, innocent daughters being repeatedly abused for hours, days, MONTHS, at a time...
The thought to me is literally nauseating because if I had to make a choice in the latter scenario - it would be a difficult one - but both my husband and I would agree that we would rather her be in the presence of God and the Angels than have her life completely shattered and ruined and tattered and twisted into an intangilble mess psychologically... left to make the best of whatever scraps of the life intended to her...
I'm sorry, but I guess I may be a more callous woman than I ever imagined - because to me, the "lesser of two evils" would be death, as far as this case is concerned.
Bottom line, I can honestly say that I would offer myself for scrutiny, investigation, whatever - the good, bad, and ugly - to get my child back. Even if it meant that I looked a fool, callous, negligent, stupid, narcissistic, egotistical, horny... WHATEVER - so what? I'd cop to it - just help me find my daughter.
I have not seen that sentiment with the McCs - and I doubt I ever will. They are cut from a different cloth than me, and I accept that. But, in the final analysis, K&G cannot postulate that their actions have been anything but self-preservation.
Liz, I personally thank you for your comment about your niece. I cannot imagine what your sister and brother in law must be going through - but I applaud your strength in sharing that with us.
And I know what you mean about people reacting in a stressful/chaotic/traumatic situation in relation to how their personalities are in everyday life.
My dear husband, whom I love more than life itself, is the most stoic, quiet, subdued person I know. And I have no doubt that he and I would react quite differently to basically any situation...
That is why I feel it is somewhat important to mention that he finds the McCanns' reactions to be "off", even without my commentary.
Yeah, yeah, this is all speculation. But what else do we have at this juncture???
Finally, a prayer from the depths of my soul: Please, GOD, and all that is Holy, do not let this case slip between the cracks like JonBenet and many others. Madeleine deserves more than this.
re: case slipping through the cracks. That is my fear too. However I think this new guy is being very proactive, taking the case back to basics. And I think Richard Branson's latest comments will further motivate the portuguese authorities to find out what happened...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/...5/
nmaddy115.xml
This case must be costing them an absolute fortune and Portugal is one of the poorer European countries.
I don't think you are wicked to think that death is the lesser of 2 evils, Emma, my mum said the exact same thing. I'm not sure if I personally would prefer my child to be dead than sexually abused. I think I'd want ANY possibility that my child was alive tbh even if the child has suffered greatly. But maybe that is almost a form of selfishness on my part. But ultimately who knows how one would feel ...
'If she is dead then she is dead but not by their hand,' was said by their PR Clarence Mitchell! Well, it's disturbingly clear what his priorities are.
Hi everyone, great to see Steve got the new thread up, I checked everyday. Have you all seen this one?
http://s215.photobucket.com/
albu...rent=church.flv
I am struck by the scruffy look of the church and restaurant grounds and was thinking that someone in a panic over a death they wished to cover up, someone who had been to the church would immediately remember the areas all around town that were in such a state, including roads with ditches dug around them.
Re Gerry and whether he is the dad or not...and Kate and the IVF procedures and the suffering thru them and her previous doubts as to whether she would ever be a mother...One may make a case for Madeleine as a 'symptomatic child', ie a child who carries the brunt of all that is wrong with the marriage (and this happens in the best of marriages), a child who symbolizes subconsciously all that is troubling her parents about their union. This may help explain why they would cover up the accidental death of THIS child in particular, why they may have snapped and gone to a place we can't fathom, why they went to We have to save our careers, the twins, our good life. There must be a reason to go to that place in their thoughts...so if Maddie was the one who pushed the buttons most often of Kate's patience, then she reminds Kate of how patient she had to be just to have this child, Maddie reminds her of all the stress and arguments and pain leading up to, finally, a pregnancy that came to fruition.
Because she wasn't his, and bc she is the symptomatic child, Gerry would find it easier to detach and go quickly thru whatever actions it takes to rid them of the body of she who symbolized All that is Wrong Between Them. See how that works?
After Maddie was born, Kate relaxed and conceived the twins naturally - very possible, as it has happened many other times in cases of IVF and adoption.
Re the sniffer dogs, I think Karina said they were 'unreliable'. Not true, and in 'good' cases only a window of about an hour and a half is needed from the time of death. The McCanns are smart (and it belies their concern for their freedom imo) to get the atty who has won a case in which such dogs were used tho it wasnt Eddie and the female, I have forgotten her name just now. They are smart to have gotten that atty bc they know these dogs, indeed these 2 dogs, are very good at their work. We are pretty certain that Kate was shown a video of these dogs alerting to her and the car et al., we are pretty sure of this cause it came from Aunt Philomena. This is supposedly the video Kate reacted to by failing to answer the rest of the questions, by failing to confess to any crime. Then the McCanns flew to England and hired that atty. Seems to me that the dogs are quite reliable indeed!
Pdg - Richard Branson said:
""Imagine your child gets stolen from you, you go through all the hell that comes with that, then when the Portuguese police cannot find the person who has stolen it they (sources) start placing stories in the press, each one of which is shown to be unfounded a week or two later but by then they have spread around the world,""
it is perfectly possible that;
1) she wasn't stolen from them
2) the leaked stories were correct
3) that they haven't been disproved
Richard Branson doesn't know any more than we do. I am fascinated by what motives a man like him to donate this money (and I suppose it is a very small amount to him) to defend people who may yet turn out to be guilty. In fact I am fascinated by the people on here who seem totally convinced of their innocence. I don't understand how anyone can be so sure. Do they still believe that the PJ are trying to frame the McCanns? And if they don't believe this then how do you explain the McCanns behaviour?
I hope that the PJ completely ignores all this press nonsense - and still say that if the McCanns genuinely want to help their daughter they should return to Portugal and answer those questions which they refused to answer before - and with fresh forensics there may be more now. They could also sack all their incredibly expensive lawyers and use the money to search.
Hi Chanel!
Where did you get the info that the twins were conceived naturally? I've only read that they were also conceived by IVF.
Re sniffer dogs - someone (I think Dee?) posted a research on the previous thread here, which came up with the result that cadaver dogs were 55-95% of the time accurate.
Hi Martina, I have no such factual info on the twins, I was doing a supposition. Just like with the rest of my comment, and most all here, lol, we just keep supposing! But there have been cases of women who used IVF and who adopted who got pregnant 'naturally' the time after that. I suppose it could have been the case with Kate. The wording of the first People magazine article on the McCanns and the twins being born also was unclear and I had the feeling this was possibly the case.
As to the canine accuracy, I read the source material differently I guess, it seemed highly favorable for Eddie and Keela, maybe that is her name - ?
But I am going to keep looking...meantime I found this wonderfully macabre bit on a cadaver dog, holy moley!
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/sc...ip/7933&
invol=1
24Horas Today:
Maddie’s team increased with Homicide Brigade
PJ in Force in the Algarve
The Judicial Police (PJ) will recheck all the steps of inquiry in the case of Madeleine McCann who vanished the 3rd of May in Praia da Luz, in Portimăo, Algarve, reports the 24Horas within judicial sources. Paulo Rebelo, the new head of the case, will also proceed to the replacement of the team to try to obtain ‘a new vision of the case’, told a high PJ officer.
‘After months and months of work in a case, it’s natural that the persons are tired and only concentrated in a vision of facts. The aim of the renewal of the team is to provide new lines and new trails of inquiry.
The task, has admitted the same source, is not easy: ‘For the moment, we will concentrate our efforts on detailed examination of all the elements of proof already collected, and the tests of the laboratory of Birmingham are still not there, in their totality, in our possession. We have the absolute conviction that Maddie has suffered an accident in the apartment of the Ocean Club, but conclusive evidences are missing, evidences that may appear at any moment.’
‘It’s a very meticulous work. The new team will continue to pursue all the lines of inquiry: First, the sequestration, next the sexual predator, the accident pure and simple, the occultation of the body, and finally the eventual crime committed by the present suspects. Everything would be passed into the fine comb’, revealed another source within the inquiries.
Yesterday, no diligences were done on the ground by elements of the PJ.
It should be done this week. The team of the investigation in the disappearance of Maddie will be strengthening none only with elements of the PJ homicide Brigade of Lisbon, but also with officers from the laboratory of scientific police.
The theory of the accident and occultation of the body continues to be more consistent theory in the PJ investigations.
Daily Mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages...ge_id=1770&
ct=5
"Portuguese police sources allege forensic test results show "bodily fluid" from a corpse in the boot of the Renault Scenic rented by Kate and Gerry McCann 25 days after Madeleine went missing.
Sources in the Policia Judiciaria are also claiming that the evidence was found on the underside of a carpet, indicating that a body was deliberately hidden there."
and the response form the McCanns?
"The Portuguese police are conducting a long-planned act of revenge for British newspapers showing disrespect at the start of the investigation.
"Police believe the criticism was inspired by the McCanns and these smears are an attempt to fight back."
So they really do believe that the PJ are trying to frame them out of spite for the press battle by the tabloids.
The article seems to suggest that the PJ are still waiting for the DNA test results - is this believable? can these tests really take this long?
John, I think that the forensics are taking so long because they want to get it just right or the PJ could have an indication of what they will reveal but the suspects should also have this. I find it hard to believe that the PJ would frame them - very difficult given that the eyes of the world are watching this case.
Chanel,
That is a good post re the dogs. They certainly did the job required of them and no one was left in any doubt. I too wondered whether the twins were conceived naturally and this does often happen, I've not seen any evidence to suggest that they too are IVF conceived. Re the video of the church, PDL is very built up! Every building seems to be overlooking.
Correio da Manhă:
Computer snatched
Application: The judge will decide if it should be analyzed
The Judicial Police snatched recently a computer that has been rented in Portugal by Gerry McCann. A forensic analysis would be performed to the computer, after the reviewing of the case by an instruction judge.
The authorities believe that’s necessary to open new lines of investigation to consolidate the theory that the parents are involved in the disappearance of their daughter. They would try to check the files and the history of that laptop, and to detect for example the email flux and also the information of the sites that Gerry McCann has consulted in the last months when he was in Portugal.
An analysis of the computer must be authorized by a judge because a non-open email is similar, in judicial terms, to a closed letter. The Portuguese Penal Procedure Code says that the lecture of an email must be authorized, and also directed by a judicial magistrate for the subject due to invasion of privacy, reports the CM.
Information collected by the CM reports that’s the first time this kind of diligence is performed by the authorities to obtain information concerning the emails of the McCanns. On the contrary to what has been vehemently reported by some Portuguese newspapers, information never verified and furthermore the telephone of the McCanns has never been bugged.
Emma -
I don't think you're cruel or callous at all. When my oldest son was first born, my neighbor told me, when she was facing the possibility of losing her house, that she would take her children into a cardboard box in a ditch with her, as long as they were with her. At the time, I thought that was the most incredibly selfish thing I'd ever heard, and told her as much. To me, then, it was a much more "motherly" thing to do to find someone who could give my son a decent life, with food and clothes and shelter, than to damn him to a life of poverty just to keep him with me.
As the years have gone by, though, that's changed, and if I were in her situation now, I don't know what I'd do. I know that the thought of not having my children in my arms every night terrifies me like nothing else and I don't know that I'd be strong enough, now, to give them away.
To me, where there's life, there's hope. Abuse can be survived, fragile emotions and psychological problems can be remedied. It may take years, it may take the rest of her life, but it's possible. But death is absolute. If she's alive, then everything else is fixable; if she's dead, it's over.
I agree DC.
Does anyone give a damn what kate looks like?
Kate McCann: ‘If I weighed another two stone, had a bigger bosom and looked more maternal, people would be more sympathetic’
from:
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/l...00252-19959495/
Her mother says:
"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."
(Actually the UK press have been more or less totally supportive - its people who have asked questions.)
Susan (Kate's mum) says: “I don’t go onto the internet, but I know some people will get pleasure from picking up on, and discussing, the negative side of things – however, it’s hard enough for us to read that people are convinced Madeleine is dead.”
(She's heard about the mirror forums then!)
They also address (and deny) all the recent rumours - and the sedation thing.
I have sympathy with her parents who are clearly suffering and come across as quite private people. But I still want them to cut out all the nonsense and address the PJ questions!!! (I know this is boring but it is the point).
Madeline's GrandMother has also confirmed that the McCanns use to give Calpol to their children:
They don't like taking tablets themselves and the only thing they have ever given their children, if they were teething or had a temperature, is Calpol. They didn't give them anything that night.
"Does anyone give a damn what kate looks like?"
John, we had (or have) posters here who commented on just that: Kate's looks. And thinking themselves awfully clever when doing so.
I think it's as superficial as you can get, but many find it oh so important and comment-worthy, or rather, important enough to condemn someone and accuse her of murder.
Yes, John, many people give too much of a damn. And it's right her mother speaks up and tries to protect her.
Daily Mail and Sun so far the only ones talking about body fluids form a corpse - wait until you believe it.
Oh...If they do have body fluids from a decomposing body in the Renault Scenic, then I'll have to say the McCanns are involved. I don't even need DNA results.
But again, we can't trust anything we read in the tabloids.
Does anyone know if O'Brien had a rental car on May 3rd? If the McCanns were involved, I think a friend helped them with the body and O'Brien may well be the one.
What do you think?
To JohnUK
You said "In fact I am fascinated by the people on here who seem totally convinced of their innocence. I don't understand how anyone can be so sure."
I don't see anybody here who is TOTALLY convinced of the McCanns' innocence BUT I do see a lot of posters who are TOTALLY convinced of their involvement in Madeleine's disappearance. "I" don't understand how anyone can be so sure.
Karina:
That's the point I was trying to make. None of us know for sure and I don't understand how people can think they are so sure (either way). But in particular their supporters do this without refering to any facts or conclusions from them. This includes our mate Richard Branson.
Martina:
I have seen a lot of criticism of the McCanns actions, behaviour, body language and the words they use. But I haven't seen anything about how thin, blonde she is or the size of her bosom. Perhaps I've missed this (its probably on the darker reaches of the mirror forum I suppose).
They (or their 'sources') are still tryiing to say that the PJ are trying to frame them because of bitterness over the UK press attacks on them. Do you really believe this? It is their responsibility as parents, EU citizens and human beings to help the police with their investigations into M's disappearance. I just want them to do this - then we will start to get to the truth.
I have this funny feeling that the claim the PJ found body fluids in the rental car will be taken back again, just like the alleged "DNA with a very close match to M's profile". It turns out they are not so sure anymore about that.
I'm also not clear on whether the doors to the appartment were closed or open on 3 May. Lots of confusing and contradictory statements on this topic too. Did they leave the door unlocked yes or no?
Could anyone gove me the latest on that?
Re Karina
If they do have body fluids from a decomposing body in the Renault Scenic, then I'll have to say the McCanns are involved. I don't even need DNA results.
Body fluids in the trunk only proves that a body has been carried out in that car. That doesnt prove it's the body of Maddie, it could be another dead body. It's the same problem with the dogs. That's why the DNA tests are important to demonstrate that it was Maddie's body.
I think people feel 'so sure' because it's been written in the papers that the PJ is convinced that she died in the apartment.
John, Karina,
I'd have to agree with you. As much as I empathise with all of M's family her mum and dad have not done her justice by not answering those questions and by being less than helpful to the investigation from the outset. Not least hightailing it back to Britain as soon as things weren't quite going their way.
John re: what's taking so long with the DNA: I was reading one of the only truly useful threads on the Mir. Forum yesterday that just focuses on DNA. Someone asked the same question from the professionsl guy in the field that started the thread. The answer is quite a long one that goes into the technical details of keeping samples contamination free, re-running tests for accuracy and change, developing cultures etc. the upshot is that it's not unusual particularly where the evidence could be used to back up a prosecution where a crime could have been comitted.
Liz
Karina, i have been going on and on about Dr O'B but without a lot of reaction. As for John and Martina as I don't know Kate McCann and as there appears to be not a lot found out about her, I can ONLY judge her by the way she looks. What else is there?
Personally her comment holds no sway with me. I think she looks like a hard faced bitch. However if she put on two stone and had a larger bosom, I would have to say she looked like a chubby, big chested, hard faced bitch.
Karina: you are right - no one can be sure either way.
I suppose the point is that if you look at their behaviour then I think you must have at least some doubts about their judgement and motivation. So then, how can anyone be certain that they are not involved? They can't. Even Richard Branson - and I would be genuinely interested to understand why he believes in their innocence - I mean factually, rationally and logically - to such a degree that he is prepared to pay for their lawyers.
I don't care what Kate looks like and I have consistently said that you can't read anything into the words they choose to use or their body language (or rather nothing definite). But really do you think that the issue is about her at all? They have a civic duty to assist the authorities (the PJ in this case) and forget about their images and how it looks to people. How can the PJ proceed unless they get the full cooperation of not only the McCanns and also the Tapas 7? the McCanns have sponsors and donations while the police are spending Portuguese tax payers money.
The suggestion that all this can be explained by some kind of stitch up attempt by the PJ is rubbish. And once you take that away then you are left with only one course of action - go back to Portugal and answer the 40+ questions. Thats it.
PS I think I'm loosing my short term memory because I am repeating myself. This case has driven me to dementia.
Stanley:
"Personally her comment holds no sway with me. I think she looks like a hard faced bitch. However if she put on two stone and had a larger bosom, I would have to say she looked like a chubby, big chested, hard faced bitch."
Will you please stop sitting on the fence and make your mind up!
Jose,
Yes, I know that DNA is important if they go to court.
I was thinking just for myself. If it is proved that the body fluids in the car come from a decomposed body, then I'll definitely think that the McCanns are involved but I know what you're saying about proving that it comes from Madeleine's body.
And John, if you say one more thing about the 40 questions, I'll have you kicked out of this thread
Karina, seeing how you don't like John mentioning the 40 questions, I'll ask, why did Kate (we will do everything to cooperate with the PJ to get M back) McCann refuse to answer questions put to her (please note I do not quote a number, but I have heard it was more than 39) by the very people who are trying to find out what happened to her daughter.
John I am still very open minded about this case in that I am not sure if I would restore the death penalty for those who are eventually found responsible for M's disappearance whoever that may be. Anyone else feel like that?
Innocent until proven guilty - her actions are unusual but so is this situation - she isnt rational but who would be in this situation.
God bless Madeleine, whatever has happened she is still "lost"
As a parent I wouldnt refuse to (which i believe is the case) that answering the questions MAY mean you werent allowed out of the country as would I still answer them??? NOT sure i would as i would want to be home safe with my other children and family BUT I would because i would do anything to find my daughter ARGHHHHHHHH i would be torn so i cannot say what i would do A VERY hard decision to make so i would be withdraw, confused too
Stanley, I don't understand your last comment at all?
Liz
Their lawyers were present when they were interviewed and they must have advised them not to answer those questions. Without knowing what these questions were about how can we say it was right or wrong not to answer them? Maybe they were the wrong questions. If someone suspects you of something you haven't done they will ask questions reflecting this and you can not possibly answer them. I have experienced this in arguments. You answer and will be accused of lying, you don't answer and will be accused of being secretive and therefore guilty.
I think you're making too much out of it, John.
And regarding Kates looks, yes, here too people were saying things like, she was lucky to get a man at all, etc.
G has updated his blog:
www.findmadeleine.com
In it he says that contrary to popular belief they do believe M is probably dead. But that they still have to hope that she is still alive.
(Words to that effect)
Sorry the words he used was 'possibly dead' not 'probably' and there's a bit difference obviosly.
Liz
The Telegraph is repeating Gerry's words in their latest article.
It also says they continue going to counselling. Wouldn't a trained counsellor know or at least have suspicions if they were living such a big lie?
Poster campaign launched
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_ne...ews/
7047579.stm
I pity them, its just tragic.
@Liz
He does say probably dead - just so devastating to admit it isnt it - i think deep down we all want her home and want to give her a big hug, so upsetting to think shes no longer with us.
I agree the parents should answer the questions no matter how hard they are. Yes they will be asked trick questions.
Since stranger abduction is so rare, these lawyers probably have no experience with that area. It is well known the parents are suspected first, so they deal with it or as they have chosen; self-preservation. But yet we are expected to sympathize about the public backlash and "Kate it's not about your lack of weight, honey."
Martina with all due respect, I do not ever remember reading on this site "here too people were saying things like, she was lucky to get a man at all, etc." Stanley was making a joke that it makes no difference to him what she looks like.
Lynn, I think thats, what its all about "Innocent until proven guilty " and this is exactly what is killing me.
For my personal opinon there are too many coincidences (according to the information we got): bloody footprints in their appt., body fluids in their rental car, differing testimonials by the T9. How often does one transport a dead body in a rental car? And how much blood needs to be on a floor till it shows parts of your footprint? And all that happened just like that in the MC surrounding?! Hhmmm.
In the end I believe that all those coincidences made the G+K suspects to the PJ. Otherwise they wouldnt have put their worldwide reputation on the line. Anyways, I am still thinking about motives and the only thing that sounds acceptabel to me is the accident version. Couldnt it be possible that they wanted to go out and M was protesting and crying?! Maybe they wanted to calm her, either with brutality (wich would explain the "blood") or with sedatives. Or both.
Sorry, for all the "maybes" but I cant stop thinking about May 3rd and what might have happened based on the theory that G+K are involved.
Some days ago I watched a documentation on German television about diffrent kinds of psychosis. They introduced a rare psychiatric syndrome called "Folie ŕ deux" - which means "madness shared by two". Since I am not a Psychiatrist its hard for me to put it in my own words. So if you are interested, have a look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fol...ki/
Folie_ŕ_deux
I found it quite interesting and it helped me to understand that people can do things without having the certainty what they have done.
I dont want to bore you, I just needed to share my thoughts again...
Dee, Stanley wrote above
"As a man I found it remarkable that K had found 1 member of my gender prepared to put his body in harms way"
which seems to imply her physical appearance being 'harmful'. I found the remark quite tasteless.
"For my personal opinon there are too many coincidences (according to the information we got): bloody footprints in their appt., body fluids in their rental car, differing testimonials by the T9. How often does one transport a dead body in a rental car? And how much blood needs to be on a floor till it shows parts of your footprint? And all that happened just like that in the MC surrounding?! Hhmmm."
Debbie, but what are the sources for this? Tabloids!
I have come to a point where I don't even click on articles with headlines that promise new 'evidence' anymore. It's just all rubbish amd will probably tomorrow be contradicted or forgotten. As long as the PJ is not saying or explaining or doing something that shows a clear (or clearer) picture I will not take these reports very seriously.
Nobody should.
I didn't say it was a tasteful joke mind you (shame Stanley)! An interesting one I heard was "everyone woman wants Kate's eye creme, because it hides the bags and redness so well from all signs of crying." We are all on pin and needles waiting for new information.
Debbie, just to let you know that link didn't work.
As for Stanley's remark IMO he's articulating his own dislike of K, and he's entitled to his own opinion.
From what I've seen of both K & G I don't care for them and I do believe that they have narcissistic tendancies, particularly G, but that doesn't stop me empathising with the tragedy that has unfolded in their lives - whatever actually happened.
Liz
Martina & Lizbee. I shall answer both of you with two words Myra Hindley. To you lizbee there is no greater case for bringing back the death penalty, and to you Martina, yes Myra Hindley's physical appearance was not just "harmful" it was downright bloody evil!
The situation with jailing child killers for life rather than executing them, is shown to be even more flawed by Ian Huntley (the Soham killer) who recently attemted suicide, yet again, and was yet again restored to health. In whose interest was this?
Stanley,
I can't with agree with the death penalty. I have a feeling though that you wouldn't be interested in why so I havn't bothered posting my opinions on this.
Liz
I agree with John that the refusal of K to answer the 40 questions back in Portugal was a huge red flag. If she were completely innocent, she would not have hesitated to answer any and all questions posed to her. Yet she balked and shut down and refused to answer any more questions after viewing the videotape of the sniffer dogs going crazy around the rental car. Makes you go hmmmmmm.
And the fact that K&G refused to take a polygraph is another reason to question their innocence. Anyone who is innocent would jump at the opportunity to take a polygraph,knowing that there is no risk to do so. Only a guilty person fears such a test. K&G obviously have a lot to hide and I am sickened by the fact that they may have concocted the whole abduction scenario to deflect attention and suspicion away from them, instead of simply admitting that a tragic and unfortunate accident took place that day in their apartment.
And what of the thousands of dollars raised by generous well wishers for the "Find Maddie" find? Does anybody know what is happening to that money? It should be seized and held in trust until this case is solved. I sincerely hope that the McCanns keep their fingers out of that money: I'd hate to think they were using it for their defence.
To be contraversial for a minute - with respect to Stanley bringing up the death penalty - if it was an accident (then obviously no death penalty) - also, I'm not even sure I can see a case for prison for Kate. What would it achieve? Two motherless toddlers? If Kate had an accident and Gerry did the cover up then maybe he should go to prison for perverting the course of justice/ concealing a crime.
The posting attributed to "Anonymous" (2 above this one) was mine. For some reason my name didn't get transferred.
Lizbee: and I believe the earth is flat but I won't bother telling you why as I know you would not be interested, and oh yes incidentally because I know I am wrong. You are right though I am not interested in your views on the death penalty, however I would be interested to hear the views of Holly & Jessica's parents who go through hell every time this little piece of excrement tries unsuccessfully to do to himself what the state should have done years ago. I would also like to hear the views of the parents of Hindley and Bradey's victims. These are the people whose opinions really matter.
On Nancy Grace tonight at the very beginning of the show Nancy said paraphrasing "Memo to Mommy; don't worry about what people say about your looks, worry about the bloody footprint & DNA evidence." Later they did a small segment they couldn't believe and had never heard a mother of an abducted child claim or go on that they were the victim. A lawyer said, "these people are not being managed well," the psychologist said, "it's all about her, I don't like that she won't look and talk to the camera." They all made comments they can't believe how the theories keep changing and it will be a big problem if this ever goes to court.
Dee
"They all made comments they can't believe how the theories keep changing and it will be a big problem if this ever goes to court."
I just watched the Nancy Grace show after I saw your post. When the attorney referred to the changing theories, they were talking about the PJ.
I thought I'd clarify that point.
Nancy said: "when we finally, if we ever get to a trial of somebody, all of these theories that have been made public are going to come out at trial and cast big suspicion on the police case."
Answer: "The defense attorneys will have a ball with this, Nancy. Because of all the different theories, they`ve now changed investigators."
Here is part of the actual transcript:
"GRACE: Ed Miller, I have to tell you, the police have changed their theories so many times, I`ve got a severe problem with anything they come up with.
And, Mike Brooks, the bottom line is, when we finally, if we ever get to a trial of somebody, all of these theories that have been made public are going to come out at trial and cast big suspicion on the police case.
BROOKS: The defense attorneys will have a ball with this, Nancy. Because of all the different theories, they`ve now changed investigators. And remember right back in the beginning, there was a suspect. Whatever happened to him, the guy that lived right there near the place? "
By the way, I am not a big fan of Nancy Grace. She will stop at nothing to get her ratings up.
24Horas Today:
New results from Birmingham sustains the crime theory
Corpse was in the car
The evidences -that could prove that Madeleine was transported already dead in the Renault Scénic rented by the McCann- are the bodily fluids of a corpse discovered in the trunk of the car, revealed the forensic tests from Birmingham.
The 24Horas reports within a source from the Forensic Science Service, that the bodily fluids were discovered under a carpet of the car, which indicates that a body had been deliberately hidden there. Remember; that in the trunk of the car there were discovered other vestiges, such as blood and hair, that were sent to Birmingham. The PJ has been informed of the corpse evidence by an email sent by the FSS of Birmingham, reports the 24Horas within police sources. To have the certainty that the corpse was the Maddie corpse, the results of the DNA tests done to the fluids are necessary. These results will be compared to other DNA tests done with blood and saliva samples and will only arrive today, according to a source from the PJ
The PJ is reconstructing, minute by minute, the paths of Kate McCann in the night of the disappearance of Maddie.
The team composed with 6 inspectors from Lisbon is working on that reconstruction.[...]Rebelo has bring to the Algarve: two inspectors of the Homicide Brigade, two inspectors of Sexual Crimes, one information analyst, and a supervisor. The24Horas has reported within a judicial source that the previous elements of the PJ of Portimăo that worked in the case will be put aside.
But the PJ knows that the main line of investigation followed by the inspectors of Portimăo, the accidental death, is the strongest theory. And Kate McCann is put in the center of that theory, since she was the person to be alone in the Maddie’s room, living this moment, and then informed Gerry of the happening when he was dining at the Tapas restaurant.
According to that theory that circulates in the PJ, the toddler’s body has been hidden before the alert of her disappearance.The Judicial knows, even without any clinical report of the child, that Maddie “was hyperactive” and a “sleep-late” person, said a PJ source. In other words, the toddler could only be under the effects of sedatives, an also her twin siblings, believe the PJ as the 24Horas has already reported
But the PJ still can’t explain where the body of Maddie has been hidden during almost a month. Since the McCanns rent the car 25 days after the disappearance of the toddler, without conservation, the car would be filled with the nauseating odor of the corpse.
I can't believe that the death penalty debate has reached this forum. And I thought that we were all civilized human beings!
I'm just glad that I live in a country (Canada) where the death penalty has long been abolished. As it should be everywhere in the world.
If K&G are guilty, they're guilty of covering up an accidental death and obstructing justice. None of these things would or should warrant the death penalty. They are not cold blooded killers.
Billie said: "I'm just glad that I live in a country (Canada) where the death penalty has long been abolished. As it should be everywhere in the world"
If it turns out that poor wee M has been abducted by a paedophile, used and then murdered, please do me a favour and lock up the perpetrator in your wonderfully civilised country. That is what we have done here for 40 years and it does not work.
Better still Billie you go visit every month, now that would be stomach churning, so why ask prison warders to do it every day?
Sharon,
You asked whether or not the doors were locked. I too have been wondering about this. My summary.
10.05pm 3 May in PDL Kate McCann comes into the Tapas Bar screaming 'They've taken her'. Forty minutes later the police arrived. The McCanns told the police that the abductor had taken Madeleine and went out the bedroom window as there were signs of a break in from there. When the windows were examined it was found that this wasn't the case. Then the police were told that the patio windows were unlocked, and that regular checks were made throughout the hour and a half/one hour that the couples
were at the Tapas Bar.
Contradictions
The PR man for Mark Warner told a newspaper that at first the parents thought Madeleine had wandered off. BUT Kate herself told Radio 4 Woman's Hour that she knew instantly that Madeleine hadn't - a claim later bolstered by a friend saying Kate found the shape of her daughter in the bed.
Gerry said he saw the door to the bedroom open which would indicate the intruder came in through the balcony doors (visible from the Bar) but later said the intruder was already in the apartment. He didn't check the place but went back to the bar, stopping to chat to Jeremy Wilkins.
I will end with this. When Dr Shipman was arrested for the murder of a patient many of his other patients said they couldn't believe it. They insisted he was innocent.
Jose, reading the translation from 24horas, it seems to suggest that maddie was found dead when Kate did her check on the children and that Kate quickly hid the body and did the alert... which would explain how they were able to go to dinner normally and gerry was able to have a normal chat with Jeremy Wilkins. But it wouldn't give the 1 1/2 hours necessary for the dogs to smell the death scent. Unless the body was hidden in the apartment (suitcase? chest of drawers?)
I tend to agree, Stanley, that reviving Ian Huntley after a suicide attempt does seem a waste of time, but legally they are obliged to do it.Unfortunately I doubt that Ian Huntley tried to kill himself due to remorse but more likely self-pity. Perhaps incarceration is a worse punishment than death? I don't agree with the death penalty, but if anyone hurt my child, I would be murderous. The law represents ourselves at our most noble, at our fairest, at our most objective rather than natural justice.
Well said pdg. I too would be murderous in that situation that's why I am glad the law is there to prevent further harm and represent us at our most just.
Liz
Re pdg , "reading the translation from 24horas, it seems to suggest that maddie was found dead when Kate did her check on the children and that Kate quickly hid the body and did the alert... which would explain how they were able to go to dinner normally and gerry was able to have a normal chat with Jeremy Wilkins."
If you do the hypothesis that Maddie was discovered dead at 22h by Kate and the McCanns didn’t know what happen during the dinner, then the death could have happen at 20h30 and it matches the 1 hour 1/2 criterion. At that moment, 20h30, the McCanns were at the Tapas Restaurant and at that time Maddie wasn’t any longer in the world of the living.
You don’t need to suppose in that theory that they hid the body in the apartment after the alert of Kate to match the 1 hour 1/2 criterion. You just have to suppose that Gerry did NOT see Maddie alive at 21h15.
It would be a very high risk for them to leave the body in the apartment after having altered the scene of crime to make plausible abduction and calling for the police.
A new supicious person has turned up acc to the Daily Express today.
"Investigators are now probing a sighting of a blonde-haired woman seen acting suspiciously outside the holiday apartment from where Madeleine disappeared on May 3.
A British woman who owns a local restaurant told police she spotted the suspect – dressed in a light-coloured trench coat – peering into the window of Madeleine’s bedroom shortly before 10pm that night.
The witness was driving her car past the Ocean Club complex in Praia da Luz when she saw the woman – who turned away after being caught in her headlights.
The restaurant owner gave a detailed statement to Portuguese detectives. It is understood the sighting was dismissed by investigators who were convinced Madeleine had not been abducted and had died inside the apartment.
But police are set to look into it again as the investigation gains new intensity."
The article also outlines the possibility that Maddie was snatched by a pedophile ring linked to Russia.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/v...addy-Mafia-
fear
In Portugal, searches in and around the Barragem da Bravura reservoir have started.
Re pdg
There is also the possibility that Maddie died at 20h30 and was moved just before 22h by a third person.
jose: good point. so the cover-up may be that Gerry did not visually check the kids at 21.05, merely listened at the door...
My brother and his wife were absolutely neurotic about getting enough sleep and would do anything not to risk waking their kids..If Madeleine was difficult to get to sleep, maybe they wouldn't open the door and look...
And I agree that Russell O'brien would be the obvious suspect if a 3rd person were involved. I assume he has been interviewed in depth by the pj.
"I assume he has been interviewed in depth by the pj."
Actually, I don't think so. We would have heard about it if he was being questioned for longer hours than others. Don't you think?
But he's also my 'favourite' suspect.
I also think that Kates comments are designed to elicit sympathy from the people. I personally think she is attractive and well turned out, albeit very thin. I htought from the tone of Nancy grace that she waw belittling Kate. I believe when the evidence comes out it will speak for itself, although without a body the subterfuge may continue.
Billie - with regards to the death penalty it is a shame we dont have it anymore - once there is evidence that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that someone is guilty of such a terrible crime then why should we keep them alive, they are a waste of fresh air. A person was found guilty in the uk recently of raping a 13 week old baby - I still am unable to justify his presence on earth as I am with Ian Huntley, Christopher Paul Neil(the pedo whose picture Interpol released)I think there is a HUGE argument for the re-introduction of the death penalty.
Maggie,
Thank you for the update on the locked doors. If the parents' first thought was that M. wandered off, it proves they left the door open. It's of course very strange that G. later stated he had the feeling there was somebody in the appartment but that he did not open the bedroom door to properly check on his kids.
Did M. and the twins sleep in the same room?
If M. died accidentally that night and G&K wanted to hide the body, would it not have made more sense to raise the alarm at a later stage? Say, at around midnight. That way they would have had more time to hide the body and plan what to do next. If K. only found out that M. died at 22:00 hrs when she checked, why would she have alerted the T9 immediately if she wanted to cover it up?
Yes, Sharon, M and the twins slept in the same room.
Maybe the inconsistencies of the Tapas9 as well as Gerry not looking in the room even with a funny feeling that someone is there might be all due to them being a bit tipsy and therefore having a clouded judgement.
Doesn't make any sense. Why would he even leave the table to check the apartment but not look into the bedroom? Why bother checking if you're not going to check?
Indeed. I remember some newspaper articles reporting that they shared about 14 bottles of wine that evening (which still seems OK for 9 people on holiday...).
So the kids all slept in the same room. Perhaps Maddy was woken up by one of the twins and wandered off to look for her parents for help. This would of course mean the appartment door had to be left unlocked. She could very well have been taken by a stranger then. Some friends of mine once left their front door unlocked and did not notice that their 3 year old wandered off at 1 am. The door closed behind him and a neighbour who happened to pass by found him alone and crying in the street and brought him back.
If Maddie was taken while wandering off alone, this could perhaps explain the sighting of this mysterious 'blonde' woman or the man carrying a blanket with the shape of a child.
Billie, they called it baby listening, or something like that. Apparently the resort also offered this service. A staff member would go to the door or window and listen if the children are ok while the parents are out. The McCanns didn't use this service, instead, so they said, performed their own baby listening.
Billie, I agree it sounds crazy. But perhaps he did not want to take the risk to wake the kids up by opening the door. So perhaps he only listened if he heard any noise or crying. Just speculation of course. It's not even certain they actually went to check every half hour. The statements of the T9 are contradictory.
Sharon, what you say makes perfect sense, only there is no evidence backing it up. Instead the PJ, so they say, have found evidence indicating an accident took place.
Kate McCann's appearance is irrelevant. It's what she may or may not have done on May 3 that is the point, not whether her looks meet anyone's idea of an anyway spurious ideal of a maternal figure.
On a separate point relating to relevance: the death penalty discussion is off topic for this thread (and indeed I should think perhaps the whole blog). Against it myself, for various reasons, but there are plenty of other places for people to talk about that if you want. Not here... please
On ths issue of the "40 questions" supposedly unanswered by Kate McCann; and of lie detector tests... again.
The right to remain silent and not to give evidence which you fee may incriminate yourself is a part of most civilised legal codes. It's an essential part of the mechanism protecting our civil liberties against a state which is by definition more powerful than we as individuals.
Portugal's code which provides for this 'arguido' status is not exactly the same as those in Britain or the US where most comentators here seem to live. But it fulfils this function. As I recall, the McCanns were given arguido status partly in order to llow them to refuse to answer questions, which they would have been obliged to answer if their status was as witnesses.
I think, like John (Uk), if the McCanns know anything they have not told the police, they really should tell. But it is in order if they do not want to for whatever reason. The law can make no presumption on that basis. Neither should we. I do find it odd, but I can imagine plenty of scenarios where I would wish to refuse to answer questions by law enforcement officers, even if I was completely innocent.
On the lie detector test: as I posted before, this has no validity in Portugal (no in Britain) and the McCanns would be ill advised to volunteer to do this, whether innocent of any crime or guilty.
I am glad that they have proper legal advice and defence, whoever is paying, even Richard Branson - as odious a self publicist as you are ever likely to encounter in any media (see, I do have feelings!). Everyone should had access to such legal resources in every case. Doesn't always happen. Doesn't mean the McCanns are guilty of anything, either.
What is totally annoying is what they say they are going do and what they actually turn out to be two different things. Why bother harping on your going to co-operate fully, take a lie detector test, etc., etc. and then DON'T. On top of that the story (camera, actually seeing kids sleeping, door closed, bed made, etc.) and the time-keep changing.
I totally agree with Reasonable Man. Death Panelty discussions are off topic. Idem re Kate's appearance. We also should not read too much into the way the couple behaves in the media. The frustrating thing is that the Portuguese tabloids regularly plant doubtful allegations, always by a 'source close to the investigation'. Very often this is total rubbish. The BBC website has a good overview on the case 'What we know'. It shows how little we actually know about the case with certainty.
A reasonable man | 10.17.07 - 11:16 am - I agree basically with your point about the right to remain silent as a legal protection, and I imagine there are circumstances where on being questioned one would choose to remain silent until you had proper legal representation.
However, the point in this case is that the McCanns have publically stated their willingness to assist the PJ - and they did this when they were not under any suspicion. There is an over riding interest which goes beyond the McCanns right to the protection of the law - and that is that their daughter is missing and needs to be found. They have said again and again that she was abducted which means that she is (in their view) in the hands of a malicious third party. If this is the case then surely her needs override any supposed risk to Kate or Gerry that they will be subject to interrogation or accusations. Their whole approach seems geared to protect themselves - in fact all the publcity seems to be along the lines of me, me, me!
Even during the original questioning the parents had their lawyer Pinto de Abreu present who could have told them which questions to answer and which to not. What kind of trick questions could there be? If they were telling the truth then there is little chance of contradiction. If however they are covering something up then they had to act as they did. They had to refuse to answer and then return to England only to slowly release a series of responses through the press.
In these circumstances the parents should have given up their right to silence (which I accept they have) in the interests of Madeleine. The only justification that could possibly hold is that the PJ were indeed trying to frame them. Which means that you have to believe that the PJ and the judges are corrupt. I know there are some who do think this - but to be honest it is the worst kind a straw clutching.
I am so glad we are back to the 40 questions - as it is my favourite subject
Competely irrelevant but interesting I suppose - the winner if this years Man Booker prize for literature writes about how she doesn't like the McCanns.
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n19/enr...19/
enri01_.html
Just goes to show how deep the effects of this story run.
Great post John!
The McCanns chose to have 'arguido' status in order to have the right to not answer the questions. Now they want that to that status to be lifted. I wonder if under Portueque's law, now that they have spoken out and answered some of those questions publicly if they have not voluntarily given up their 'arguido' status. Probably not, just added "obstruction to justice" in addition and that would be like calling the "kettle black" as it appears to be done on both sides.
Sharon I was only referring to direct quotes made by the couple themselves.
John (Uk) - good link. I haven't read her novel but Ann Enright certainly brings a sharp writer's eye to this case - perhaps one of truth (and the agonising absence of it) being more compelling than fiction.
I am sure she would never have been able to conjure this thread and its predecessors out of her own imagination!
I also agree with both your assessment of the McCanns' whole presentation and of the Portuguese police.
So far, I don't buy the McCanns' story. I don't like the way people are characterised as pro- or anti-McCann (less here than in other places). I am neither. I just think they have not told the truth yet.
Re Dee I wonder if under Portuguese's law, now that they have spoken out and answered some of those questions publicly if they have not voluntarily given up their 'arguido' status. Probably not, just added "obstruction to justice" in addition and that would be like calling the "kettle black" as it appears to be done on both sides.
The justice secrecy law (art. 371 of the Portuguese Penal Code) only says the person -who gives information concerning the procedure protected by justice secrecy which can not be divulgated- is punished by 2 years of imprisonment maximum. If the McCanns were condemned by this law, they won’t loose their status of arguido.
So in other words they are stuck with their decision for the 8 (I believe) months or a Magistrate clears them. Thanks Jose.
Arguido status gave them more protection in the eyes of the law. They were allowed legal representation and I believe we all would have taken that, as in another country you do not know how things work. I think the reluctance of not answering the questions was probably a legal advisory than a blank refusal. The issue surrounding what has happened to Madeleine is still in question but until the fluids are identified and tested and confirmed 100% everything is still up in the air. If the fluids are from a corpse that matches Madeleine's DNA then this case turns into simply figuring out how Kate or Gerry killed Madeleine. IF the DNA isnt from Madeleine the thought is that she was kidnapped on order by Russian Mafia where she would have been subjected to god knows what as the business of child traffiking/porn/abuse is a million dollar business out there especially in places such as Uzbekistan since Russian was split as it is impossible to police these places.
The facts again are more and more ambiguous, exaggerated by the media and reported as hearsay.
I will wait with bated breath to see what the result of the DNA proves. Again rumour has it that it is a definite match.
Wow, I've just read Ann Enright's diary re: the case. It just about sums up where I'm coming from other than my absolute fascination with knowing the precise (and true!)timeline of events on 3rd May.
Thanks for the link John, on a personal level it makes me feel more okay with my obsession (in getting to the bottom of this mystery) by knowing that all sorts of people are going through the same thought processes and coming to similar conclusions.
Note that in the UK there is a 'Dispatches' programme on C4 terrestial at 9 pm tomorrow (Thursday) night examining the case.
Liz
Liz
Here's a link to the outline of tomorrows 'Dispatches' programme.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle2681658.ece
This appears to outline the case Re: abduction.
Liz
Thanks for the link, Liz.
As much as I want the McCanns to be innocent, this article is not very persuasive. I would expect better reasoning from someone who believes in an abduction.
Article "PRIEST: I WAS DECEIVED"
"Last night the priest admitted he had got too close to the couple. But he insisted he was only driven to help them by their “inconsolable grief” in their days after Madeleine vanished. He said: “I was deceived. I was just doing my job supporting lost souls."
"The couple stopped seeing Father Pacheco and left Portugal without saying goodbye - leaving the church keys with another clergyman."
"I was deceived"
Those are pretty strong words. I wish the priest would elaborate on what he means.
The 24Horas Today:
Cadavers in putrefaction always emit fluids
Smell coming from the car
Between the day Madeleine vanished, May 3, and the day the McCanns rented the Renault Scénic there were 25 days. After 25 days, a cadaver ‘already could be in advanced decomposition’ explained Pinto da Costa, from the Forensic Medicine Institute of Porto. But it isn’t as absurd as it may appear the first time, that somebody has transported the Maddie’s body in the car 25 days after her death. ‘In fact, a cadaver emits unpleasant rotting odor. But this odor may come from the inside of the car and may be attenuated. It’s only necessary to have the windows of the car all open and a good ventilation’, added Pinto da Costa.
The putrefaction of cadaver could be retarded or advanced depending on the conditions in which it is maintained. ‘It will not be an advanced putrefaction only if it has been kept in adequate temperature condition, that is, in a fresh place with a temperate between 5-10°C maximum’. A cave, for example, fulfills this requirement. A corpse put in water needs more time to rot. Also in a liquid, a cadaver has a better conservation. ‘A corpse disposed in water rots with greater difficulty’, explained Pinto da Costa. ‘If it is in an aerated place submitted to humidity and heat, it would decompose more rapidly’. The fluids coming from a body are the source of the rotten smell. The snifter dogs can always detect this smell, added the officer, better than a human.
It’s those bodily fluids that were discovered in the boot of the Renault Scénic rented by the McCanns, according to the forensic report of Birmingham. ‘If a cadaver is transported in a vehicle it leaves always fluids that may impregnate the car’s carpets’. A cadaver in putrefaction always shows a black skin, it is affected by gasification and may swollen.
It seems to me that the reason for the abduction pivots around the belief that those involved, wealthy, middleclass professionals (doctors no less) couldn't possibly do something like this. 'It beggars belief'. But let's look at a few facts. Sure treatment from doctors is good by and large, however it's far from perfect. Iatrogenic disease is common in the treatment of patients. Doctors do make mistakes, especially when it comes to dispensing medicenes. Medical accidents are a fact of life, otherwise we wouldn't have the need for second opinions. It certainly does not beggar belief. Recently in Glasgow two doctors drove a flamming car into an airport entrance. The whole medical community worldwide was in shock that their caring and healing profession could resort to terrorism. However when you think about it doctors are highly trained and intelligent. They need to remain detached and emotionally removed from those they treat. They have access to medicenes. In Britain they are members of a powerful organisation that seeks to protect it's own unless there is incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. IMO doctors are more than any other highly paid profession best at killing.
Another article from the 24Horas:
The new team of investigators wants to visit the apartment
PJ returns to the Ocean Club
The Polícia Judiciária (PJ) went back to the Ocean Club apartment where Madeleine McCann vanished, May 3. Just arrived in the Algarve, on Monday, the new homicide team has gone to Praia da Luz to recognize the place where everything happened. ‘They were there Monday afternoon’ said to the 24Horas a resident in the resort, adding that the investigators stayed a ‘few time’, only the necessary to cover the several divisions and observe the several entrances to the interior.
This is the second time that the PJ goes to that place in few days. Already in the possession of some elements of the analysis ordered to the Laboratory of Birmingham, the investigators from Portimăo were already in the Ocean Club last week. They were seen by a witness of the process: Pamela Fenn. The English woman -that lives in apartment above the one where vanished the little Maddie- has seen the policemen and recognize some of them: ‘ The Chief inspector [Tavares de Almeida] was there and he interrogated me. Some days ago, they were there all the morning, has affirmed Pamela Fenn to the 24Horas.
Furthermore, sources within the investigation said that new diligences will be done on the ground in the next days. Nevertheless, it would be only a reexamination of the evidences collected at the beginning of the investigations.
The results from the Laboratory of Birmingham still arrives drop by drop, but a judicial officer reports that everything points to the involvement of the McCann couple in the disappearance of their daughter and the occultation of the respective corpse.
The PJ still don’t have certainties, but according to what the 24Horas has reported, it is analyzed the possibility that Maddie has been maintained in a closed place and her body congealed.
‘We are studying and verifying all the possibilities. In concrete, we only have the tests done by the Portuguese Forensic Medicine Institute, the scientific laboratory of the PJ and another great part comes from what we have solicited to the English. The truth is that nothing emerges leading to an accusation of McCann in a ‘preemptive way’ revealed a police officer.
Another source added ‘We are searching for evil and we want to find the body of the toddler. It’s our main objective. We will do new searches where and when it would be necessary and the McCanns or their Friends would be newly interrogated by the British authorities. There is a lot to clarify, above all the alibis presented by them.
Not much time tonite so a few quick thoughts...
Re the McCann's presumption of death: Didn't Karina point out that Gerry wrote in his blog the very words 'Madeleine's death'? We can say we aren't going to consider their body language but we must consider their words I believe. People 'sign' their crimes, their actions.
Re the DNA and the infinite time for the tests on it: Supposedly one can get a quick match of about 80% right off, ie enough to know say the family of origin, but it takes much longer to match all the markers of an actual individual. Add to that the tests to show that said individual was deceased as opposed to alive, and it takes longer still. Add to that retesting so as to avoid a national embarrassment...This length of time bodes ill for the McCanns imo.
Re the new possible abductress, a blonde woman wearing a light-colored trenchcoat looking into M's bedroom window: Kate wears a beige topper, not a trench, all the time. Could it have been her? Was she a lookout? Were she & Gerry talking thru the window in the moments preceding the hiding? Was M's body handed out the window to her? Was it she who carried the body to its initial hiding place and thus tainted her clothing with the scent of death? Could that place have been a service area, ie, a laundry room where a woman would look perhaps less conspicuous?
We need to think differently if we are to think like the McCanns.
Lizbee thank you for the link to the Dispatches programme. I agree with Karina this man (David Canter) is not persuasive in his argument, however I shall watch the item tonight hopefully with an open mind. I could not help but gasp in amazement when Mr Canter tells us that the English police are so much better equipped to deal with a large enquiry like this. That would account for Rhys Jones's murderers being apprehended so swiftly after the 11 year old was shot in a public place in broad daylight! Get real Mr Canter our police only find a burglar if he is wearing a mask and carrying a large cloth bag with swag written on it. It is very obvious that Mr Canter is fortunate enough never to have been a victim of crime in his own country.
Chanel,
if the blonde woman was KM how would that fit into the time line of events on the night of 3 May?
http://www.channel4.com/news/art...disgrace/
897447
The MC's spokesman is more and more on the defensive, but he does not sound very convincing IMO. Strange to refer to the case being 'still very much an active police investigation'.
Mr Mitchell: "Officially, I cannot discuss the detailed aspects of the case - it is still very much an active police investigation.
'I would point to some of these stories this morning - they are unsourced, they are unsubstantiated...'
Clarence Mitchell"What I can say though is Kate and Gerry have nothing to hide at all. They are perfectly happy to answer any of this, if it comes to it.
"There are wholly innocent explanations for anything the police may or may not have found.
"I would point to some of these stories this morning - they are unsourced, they are unsubstantiated...
"Frankly, some of the headlines this morning are a complete disgrace."
bleedin' hell maggie had to look it up:
i
·at·ro·gen·ic [ahy-a-truh-jen-ik, ee-a-]
–adjective
(of a medical disorder) caused by the diagnosis, manner, or treatment of a physician.
This articles makes one think about all this circus:
http://www.anthonysteen.org.uk/r...ype=news&
ID=323
I came across this article -
For want of a better explanation I think what is occuring is what I would term "fascination". We have all become focused on this case as amatuer sleuths - by "we" I refer to everyone who knows of this case. The simple morbid curiosity and fascination has got to us all. We crave for news on Madeleine - good or bad, to put our minds at rest. We "pick fault" at the McCanns and criticise them in some cases as "we are not like them" "we would never do that" and "we certainly think they are lying" WHY do we all do this, what gets to us about this case. IT is simply the not knowing, but is it wrong of us to do this? Are we guilty of making a bad situation worse? Are we like the press who "use" the story to sell their papers. Why do we keep going over and over the situations in our heads. We enjoy it, hand on my heart, I love this, love to delve into the minds of criminals and innocent people and to conclude theories. I have a so many theories and with each piece of evidence I can say "Ah ha I TOLD YOU SO". So why do I really care, why do we want to know.
yes it is simply that we must hope she is ok and want "resolution" but also we want to "the detective" in us want and love the thrill of the chase.
My views of the McCanns changes daily, from pity to hate to despair. One thing this whole sorry mess has taught me is that it is amazing how as a society, as a group and as a person we can be so easily swayed and fact or fiction we love a good gossip and this "witch hunt" is turning into that. Everywhere you go when people talk of this case Madeleine , takes a back seat the focus has turned to Kate and Gerry. Even with the new and improved - I use the term loosely will we ever know what happened, my guess is no, my hope is yes. To the bitter end of this investigation one thing is constant Madeleine is missing. The focus shall shift so many times the finger will point in many directions, "new" evidence shall keep turning up and the public shall keep on "sleuthing" and buying the media hype almost forgetting this is fact not fiction.
testing 123
Karina,
I don't think the Priest's words need elaborating. His message is loud and clear.
Something strikes me as very odd in the article below. Why would Gerry ask a friend to "check in on" Kate and the kids while he was playing tennis on that fateful afternoon?
http://tinyurl.com/yr7nj4
Reasonable Man, Billie et al: Funny I can never find anyone who supports capital punishment that wants to stop discussion on the subject.
Thats how it came to be abolished, we were told we were not fit to discuss or vote on its abolishment, MPs knew best. Tell you what Reasonable Man, lets find out how reasonable you are the next child killer they release from jail, can he/she be your new neighbour? Or are you just another NIMBY?
The Daily Mail article says
"Mr Payne, 41, is bound by Portuguese secrecy laws and cannot speak out about the events on that night."
This brings me back to my original question. Are the Tapa7 people bound by secrecy laws? This would be the reason why they are not talking.
I believe it was JOSE who said the Tapa7 are not "arguidos" and therefore COULD talk about the case.
Can someone clarify this issue?
Re Karina I believe it was JOSE who said the Tapa7 are not "arguidos" and therefore COULD talk about the case.
In fact, any citizen is subjected to the justice secrecy law (art. 371 from the Portuguese Penal Code).
This is interesting:
"Forensic scientist Professor David Barclay, part of the four-man team who reviewed the case for Channel Four's Dispatches show, said: "We examined all of the available evidence and the conclusion we came to was that there appeared to be some significant inconsistencies."
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top...89520-19969064/
Karina I read just a few days ago an article regarding quotes from R.O'Brien. He claimed Gerry asked all of them not to make comments to the press, that his PR person wanted control. I don't have time to find the article, it could have been around Aug. 21. Given that and nothing but silence from the 7, I find the quote today from Payne rather odd and why now? Hanging Kate out to dry, insanity plea...don't know?
Something weird is going on. One of the comments to the link that Billie put in her post said that if Kate was fat and ugly people would have more sympathy with her - WRONG. A fat and ugly woman would have been in jail by now or charged. It's is without a doubt the most rubbish article I've ever read on this subject. Shameful.
JoseFR
You said "In fact, any citizen is subjected to the justice secrecy law (art. 371 from the Portuguese Penal Code)."
This does not make sense. Look at all the blogs and newspaper articles on this case !!
After further thought, I would like to add:
I find the quote today from Payne rather odd and why now? Hanging Kate out to dry, insanity plea...don't know? "More likely, shrink that time-line down for Kate, of course."
Dee, you threw out a possible insantity plea as motive for Payne speaking out like that...makes me think...it just doesn't make any sense to me that Gerry would ask him to "check on Kate" -- why would there be a need for a check unless something was amiss; perhaps Kate was having a difficult day with the kids...perhaps they'd had an argument...who knows. Payne wants us to believe that Gerry was concerned about Kate that particular afternoon. So...if charges are eventually laid, the defence could be that Kate temporarily "lost it" due to extreme stress or something to that effect...
"Probe too big for Portugal cops"
Another "expert" talking about the mistakes made by the PJ.
http://tinyurl.com/32f7tp
I understand there is a TV show now on British TV. Are you watching it? I wish I could see it but I am here in California :-(
Karina,
The 'Dispatches' programme is on in around 45 mins and it's an hour long show.
Here's a link to the outline of the show:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle2681658.ece
I should think there should be people commenting about it afterwards and there might be a video of it on-line, I'll find a link to Channel 4.
Liz
Karina,
It looks like you might be able to watch it on-line with their new Channel4on demand service:
http://www.channel4.com/documentaries/
Check it out, I've not used it before,
Liz
Billy yes, it is pretty strange. Earlier reports were he had stopped in around 7 I believe, but no mention why. Why should this be explained in Gerry asked me to check on Kate? Why is he coming out with this now and it must be with Gerry's blessing? Why I leaned toward the time-line was it has been mentioned the PJ are going back to this and making some kind of model. If it is due to set-up a possible insanity plea, they perhaps know damning evidence is going to come out? It's another mystery twist.
They aren't bound by Portuguese law to stay silent as they are not suspects, however I believe from an article i read that they are indeed staying stum for the sake of their friendship BUT i also deeply feel they are keeping mouths shut tight because they are scared they break down, say the wrong thing and "leak" that little bit of information that will close this case.
Dee, yes, the evidence will likely prove extremely damning and I suppose that Team McCann is allowing these controlled leaks in order to set the stage for their defence.
Channel 4 on demand - thanks liz for the tip however this is the message:
Can I still watch your programmes if I live outside the UK?
Category: 4oD | Sub Category: Who can access 4oD
No. 4oD programming is only available to residents of the UK and the Republic of Ireland. The programme rights we hold are limited to these geographic regions and it is illegal for us to allow them to be downloaded elsewhere.
Hopefully the people who are able to watch can post their findings for us (unfortunate ones)!
Lynn you make a very good point. It will be interesting to see if more of them talk in the next few days or if it is just David P. for his odd tid-bit?
I know sometimes quotes are recycled from previous articles, but this one is new as well as Kate & the bed the other day. How do some on these one-liner quotes happen? I find it hard to believe David called the paper, was it C.M.? If anyone knows how the media gets these quotes, please let me know.
Have just watched the Dispatches programme and thought it gave a good an honest appraisal of the situation so far. They dismissed the wandering off and abducted by organised gangs as being extremely unlikely and so they think the most likely scenario is either a local perpetrator (if this is the case then Madeleine is now most likely dead) or that there was an accident - (need to await the forensics). They also said that FSS would never leak information and that what's being printed in the media is likely to be untrue.
Hi All,
Well they could have saved a helluva lot of money in sending that crew of detectives over and sent a selection of us! IMO we knew all (well practically) all that they 'found out' already and the only bits that were 'new' to us are because they were able to walk the walk through different scenarios. I was a bit bored in places I must say as they established:
The appt. could not be properly monitored from the Tapas bar therefore an abductor could have escaped unseen.
There are lots of alleyways and scrubland nearby which could have assisted in her disappearance whether she wandered, was abducted or 'something else happened'.
No-one could establish why DNA and prints were found on the appt. shutters etc. or in the car - they concluded 'it's a mystery how they got there'and they're keeping an open mind!
There are inconsistencies in the timeline of events.
The PJ could have been far more throrough in initial actions.
The media have created a frenzy which muddies the water, they were also responsible for pointing the finger at Murat, they don't help matters by inconsistent reporting.
IMO The doc. ended sort of suddenly and it was as if they'd been told which areas not to explore too rigourously such as T9 - esp G & K, 40 Qs etc. all the stuff we want to know.
The program did not really cover/evidence the wherabouts of M from the last photo at 2.29 pm to 10.00 pm. I noted that the 'bonded Nanny' in the creche last reported seeing M at lunchtime when I'm sure she's the same one who earlier in a news article said that she'd given her high tea?
Anyone else see it?
Liz
There is a thread on the mirror forum with a running commentary on the programme (starting at page 3 or 4) which will give you an idea. It was a pretty fair documentary but the 'experts' were hampered by lack of access plus they only knew the same (or less) information that we know. It showed that it would have been easy to bury the body on the beach (its quite big and rocky) and that there are large drains/tunnels which a body could easily have been hidden in (if the police were not diverted by the abduction claim). PLus the bins are really large and there are lots of them.They also showed that the fingerprints found on the shutters showed that the shutters were opened from the inside. Plus they showed that there was absolutely no possibility of seeing who was going in and out of the apt from the tapas bar.
Also the sliding doors entry was hidden in shadow. The alleyway has an exit up to the car park.
They examined all the theories and in the final analysis one of them concluded that it was most likely that harm came to the child in the apt. I guess they couldnt say more because it would render any trial unfair...
Also i believe that the secrecy laws are about details specific to the police investigation but that the mccanns and tapas 7 can talk about what happened that day. It seems to me that the mccanns are using the judicial secrecy law as an excuse to not answer inconveniant questions.
Previously they said that Kate had not spent any time alone with the children that day now David payne is asked to check up on her?
Watching re-run on 4+1 now. Interesting views of PDL. A lot of scenes of "detectives" discussing possibilities without any real new insights. And hard to take whole programme seriously as proper investigative journalism when you see the "detectives" being refused access to Ocean Club in to check scenario of tapas bar.
Thanks Liz & PDG! Question: I haven't never heard about finger prints on the "inside" of the shutters before. Who's finger prints, have they indentified them? I have a reason for asking.
Apparently the police now have the authority to seize the laptop and K's diary. Isn't it a bit late? Not likely G&K would have left anything incriminating in either place.
One thought has come to me now I'm reflecting on the program is that it 'prepared the way' no matter what the outcome. In other words there is some indication that it could have been an accident in the appt. or a local perp. but either way they have said nothing that could be challenged after any verdict. I guess if any of us were to go on such a jaunt and put our views on the telly we wouldn't have been much more forthcoming with this being an open criminal investigation.
As pdg said it was particularly good at looking at the places we can't see where a body could have been placed.
they froze a still of the video of the pj taking fingerprints of the shutters and it clearly showed 2 thumb prints in a certain position. The prints are on the outside of the shutters. They then checked the position of these thumb prints on another window/shutter and it showed that the shutter was opened from the inside. But whose thumb prints they are, well, maybe that is part of the evidence?!
a key word that they used was "staging" as in "staging a scene".
diary and laptop. It would be possible to see if things had been rubbed out in the diary or pages removed. And as far as I am aware, nothing can be removed from a computer (or it would be difficult without magnetically erasing everything), which is how Gary Glitter got caught with child porn. Everything is still there! Attempts to remove material would point to guilt no?
G would certainly have thought of erasing his hard drive. And I'm sure K has rewritten her diary.
Hey, I've just read a really interesting post (from Mir. forum Craig1) someone who's just returned from holiday in PDL and got local insight, it's quite long... should I paste it here?
Liz
Yes, Liz, print it, please.
Brown to discuss case with his Portuguese counterpart...
http://tinyurl.com/2mcl7h
hi karina, can you not get the mirror forum from the states?
This is not from me it's a quote from craig1 on mir.forum who has given his permission to cut and paste:
'Hi folks as I said Just got back from PDL and have somne info that may confirm a lot of our thoughts!!!!
Had a long chat with our villa manager who has lived in PDL all her life and just about knows everyone also spoke to couple of contacts so here goes (sadly I just missed despatches programme 2 nite.....so hope I am not repeating info)
Chaplins
Yes the Mccanns and Co definetely went there on not ONE but TWO occasions!!
Nite of Maddys Kidnap
Yes they did drink 14 bottles of wine!!! And when maddy was discovered misssing the family nor friends did not search.......... 300 ex pats plus locals and the police were out searching everywhere!!! Kate did go jogging next morning ...and intially everyone had sympathy with them ...the kidnap story was never one many people believed ...most thought maddy had wandered off..but sympathy began to wane a bit when folk discovered kids were left alone every nite .......and behaviour of parents I.e. almost celeb status .......attitude and setting up of web site!!!! And the acted as if they were on extended holiday!
Villa they rented cost the mcanns ÂŁ800 per week
The Priest and English Minister got in big trouble with the church because they gave keys ......and as My contact said there are devout people who have lived in PDL all their lives and never had keys!!!!! They are digging up side of church at moment looking for body !!( it just looks like roadworks but was assured that this was the case)
The Neighbour (who never spoke to press!!! ) heard kate being very agressive to children when gerry at tennis.....and maddy crying for her daddy!! The twins did NOT wake up the nite maddy went missing and everyone thought it strange!!
Robert Murat is a really nice guy who just trys to be helpful particularly to British Community......,.,and felt so much sympathy for the Mc Canns the nite maddy went missing and he said "what if it was my sophie " apparently his whole worlds been upset by this nightmare. I was told he is so nice ..when Baptista was closed ...he drove to Lagos next town and bought lots and lots of bottles of water for journalists and police !!!
On Arguido .....,K and G gave home adress to PJ which means they do not have to return to algarve and also in portugeuse law I was told cant try them for murder if no body!!!! Locals do not think they will ever return to algarve
They booked plane tickets for home on the Thursday........ the general consensus is they scarpered as guilty!! PJ may prosecute for child neglect!!
Forensics...PJ have the expertise like Birmingham ......but they were so sick of negative spin they asked GB to do ...so when came back couldnt be accused of fiddling with it !!!!
The PJ guy that was moved not sacked was just sick of the whole mcCann spin and slagging of PJ.......he wanted to prosecute re child neglect!!!
Apparent
Wow, Lizbee thank you for that. Very interesting indeed, especially the bit about Murat and Kate being aggressive. And Chaplins two nights.... I also read somewhere (prob Mirror Forum), that the McCann's will face child neglect charges if the evidence is insufficient.
I also saw the Dispatches programme and left my thoughts above. It was interesting what they said about the 'staging'. Also they didn't dwell on the leaving of the children nightly but referred to it as the 'nightly routine'.
I dont know what to be more shocked by: the dinners at chaplins? the jogging the next morning? nobody in the family and friends searching? the treatment of robert murat?
Sorry I don't mean to imply that Murat was aggressive. Apologies for double post.
This is one of the first articles. I would assume the statements and the press reported accurately. Why wouldn't they at this point...just report the facts; it's a legit. news story at this point. I believe the initial reports & quotes will be the best info. on what transpired. Before the papers just want to have "the Maddy story" to sell papers.
http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/ne...-
name_page.html
"The window shutters, which had been CLOSED since we arrived on Saturday, were open along with the window. THEY CAN BE OPENED FROM THE OUTSIDE." (Sorry since I can't do bolding I will use Caps (not shouting at you all)).
"The window opens on to a car park. The door to the room was shut. It looks as if someone has come through the window and possibly left through the door." Now this is being reversed.
"Kate said the shutters of the room were smashed. (obviously proven untrue).
Then we have: "Heart specialist Gerry McCann rang his sister Trish in Scotland after Maddy vanished from her cot placed between two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie. Trish revealed yesterday: "He was breaking his heart, saying 'Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted'."
Other quotes, that makes it seem; a lot more was done initially then we were lead to believe.
"Officers sealed off the five-storey holiday block with crime scene tape and fingerprinted the shutters and window sill outside Maddy's room. A patio to the rear of the block, believed to be attached to the family's two-bedroom apartment, was also sealed off."
By late afternoon the hunt for Maddy had intensified with helicopter crews, firemen and maritime search teams involved.
A special criminal investigation team from the Policia Judiciria was travelling down from Lisbon.
Sky News weather presenter Jo Wheeler said local police had been giving out maps and telling people where to look. She said: "It's very well organised."
Obviously this is all hearsay but so are our speculatons. If it's true that they went to Chaplins twice, they didn't actually search on the night, K went jogging next day, giving keys to well known devout local users of the church is unheard of, tickets home were booked as soon as the heat was on, Murat is highly regarded and very well known locally, they're digging under the pretence of roadworks... Where does that leave the McCs?
craig again:"3 different people confirmed chaplin story.,..apparently well known fact in PD"
Also in the programme they showed some early clips of Kate, her meeting the pope and so on, and the overriding impression I got from her was fear, trembling with nervousness.
Just supposing it was a local perp. ...they certainly made it easy for them. No wonder G didn't want anyone from the Tapas bar talking.
Another thought, the findmadeleine campaign asks for any information leading to M beng found... doesn't that statement include local knowledge such as the above?
Dee: Channel 4 On Demand does say it's for UK and Eire only. You could try just saying you live in the UK or Eire and see if they block your IP address or if they just trust you. If you can't get access, it will be worth checking YouTube as some programmes tend to find their way there fairly quickly.
Actually you didn't really miss much as you may have gathered from other comments on the programme above.
Here's a wee bit more of my impressions of it.
The general location shots around PDL were intersting, but the Best of British Detectives were a bit mediocre. You felt when one or two made criticisms of the Portuguese investigation that it wa a bit rich coming from some chumps whose programme editor couldn't even get them inside the Ocean Club for a look see.
They set out 3 main hypotheses: M wandering off; abduction; and parents involved.
They basically ruled out wandering off on the grounds that she would have likely been found.
The abduction hypothesis was presented in more detail than the others. However the programme didn't subject the abduction hypothesis to even simple questions like: why take M when there were two younger kids asleep in the same apartment?
It concentrated mainly on the possibility that an abductor could easily disappear in the streets around the apartment.
The forensic psychologist was brought on to profile a potential abductor. I paraphrase but he said - after the qualification firstly: if Madeleine had not been harmed deliberately or accidentally by her family - that the putative abductor was most likely to be a local (PDL resident) person and not an organised international gang of child traffickers. This local person was not likely to be a woman interested in replacing a lost or otherwise absent baby (M was too old), and also not likely to be a paedophile who would be interested in pubescent girl (M was too young) but most probably a local person with an obsessive personality who had built up an obsession with someone like M and had taken her opportunistically. He reckoned this type of person, if they had take Madeleine, would under other circumstances have later tried to release her - but in this case would have probably panicked as a result of the huge media frenzy and would probably have killed her and disposed of her to hide their action.
In other words he ruled out almost all the potential abductors which most abduction theories assume.
One of the "detectives" mentioned the report about a man having been seen carrying a hild wrapped in a blanket. But this "evidence" was not subjected to any further discussion.
The search guy kept looking down a well - of which there are many on the sourrounding countryside - and into a concrete drain pipe - of which there are several - which opens onto the beach saying he had a team of experts who were trained to look in wells and up drainpipes. As if to imply that the Portuguese police couldn't do this. There was lots of speculat
craig again:"3 different people confirmed chaplin story.,..apparently well known fact in PD"
Also in the programme they showed some early clips of Kate, her meeting the pope and so on, and the overriding impression I got from her was fear, trembling with nervousness.
Thanks everyone for you comments on the show, no I wasn't asked where I was from, my email .ca must have gave them the clue.
So if I understand the show right; it was to prove if an abduction/kidnapping did happen and basically rules it out, logically speaking?
Liz "the findmadeleine campaign asks for any information leading to M being found..." I believe it is not only if she is found alive, but in addition, any and all people prosecuted. One pretty tall order, before any money is released for other families, if I understand the fund right? Why in the world can they keep rolling the dough in at this point? I know it is not a registered charity, but a warning should be issued by perhaps a gov.t agency, that people understand it is not been given charity status.
ion that the searches to date had been poorly conducted, but no real evidence of this.
The programme did say that the wheeled rubbish/garbage bins - of which there were many - in PDL streets had all been emptied in the early morning of 4 May soon after the first search had been called off, and their contents owuld have been taken to the town dump. We were given the impression that this place has not been searched, though this was not said explicitly I think.
There was a cursory run through the parental involvement hypothesis.
The forensic detective (a different guy, one who I took to have previously worked with the British forensic experts now being used in this case) showed how the shutter could not have been opened from outside (presumably much as the PJ concluded themselves on Day 1 after the McCanns had claimed it was). However I didn't hear him or anyone say explicitly that this fact may have undermined their story (and hence credibility).
Without clearly explaining his line of reasoning, this forensic basically came to the conclusion that Madeleine most likely came to harm in the apartment.
The rest of the forensic "evidence" was skirted over as media speculation. Slightly ironic given that they had just spend around 40 of their 50 odd minutes speculating on abduction.
He did make the point noted above that in his view the forensic experts will not have released any findings or evidence whatsoever to any media. He said this had never happened in more than 20 years of his experience with them.
In all - not much of a programme.
The only thing it confirmed for me is the fact that no responsible parent would leave 3 kids sleeping in *that* apartment, apparently unlocked, and go off to a restaurant *that far away* for *that* amount of time - even if checking back regularly - to eat and drink with their mates. I guess that's why so many reasonable people - like me - have basic questions which the McCanns just haven't answered.
And just seeing the location shots kept raising again all the questions exercised here about the timelines and inconsistencies in the reported stories and so on - scarcely any of which were even mentioned in the programme.
(Oh Stanley - I don't want to waste another post on capital punishment so I won't respond to your question above, as my point is that it should be raised in another place and not here. I often do agree with many of your other posts though How reasonable is that?)
Not sure what happened with previous post getting split but hope you can read parts 1 and 2!
While looking for Dispatches prgoramme on YouTube (not there yet, it would be too soon anyway I think) I came across this
http://www.youtube.com/user/jkleinhuizen
I hadn't seen it mentioned here or anywhere before (if it has been discussed, my apologies). This person is promoting their company and their security software which does what they call "Layered Voice Analysis". The two links currently on this user's Youtube page are worth a look and listen.
I should think the McCanns will never do any lie detector/plygraph test since they will have (correctly) been advised not to - but maybe they have already unwittingly done something even more damning, just by speaking.
Or maybe this is a hoax! What do you think...
Actually A.R.Man I did see that and found it extremely interesting. As the person who used the computer generated results said paraphasing here is was a small sample. Note all you unbelievers of body language (the lie detector red flagged this to say the least)!!! It was suggested on the forum and someone said they would follow up suggesting to this guy he do Kate's 20+ minute phone interview and that would be even better!
Interesting article in the Daily Mail today.
http://tinyurl.com/2e2rpb
From the article:
Portuguese police have reportedly admitted that they have no evidence allowing them to accuse the parents of missing Madeleine McCann of any crime.
From the same article:
However the paper also quoted a source who insisted that all evidence still pointed towards the McCanns' involvement in the disappearance of their daughter.
Which leads us to this brilliant statement:
The quotes appeared to come from two different unnamed sources.
Well, I don't know about anyone else, but my faith in the news reporting surrounding Madeleine just skyrocketed.
(And yes, that is sarcasm you detect...)
Thanks to everyone who summarized the TV program.
Did they even talk about DNA results?
I've been thinking a lot about this case and IF the DNA results show that DNA of a decomposed body was found in the trunk of the car, then I will be convinced that the McCanns were involved.
Will these results ever be officially released? I am beginning to lose my patience
@ Maggie:
Well said, my friend.
I agree wholeheartedly at your 4:30AM post above - I could have written it myself, if I were able to be so concise and to the point...
Karina, the programme was likely cut before any DNA evidence was released. But good question...I thought the DNA results were supposed to have been made public this past Monday. Wonder what the delay is?
Disclaimer: this is merely a comment based upon my very keen intuition, and nothing more - however, my intuiton has proven to be very reliable so far, after decades on this plane - again, opinions/"leaked" facts are all we have at the present, and I write this with all due respect to every party concerned:
K is a "type A" personality, which could imply that she likes to have control, likely a perfectionist, and has a temper. Most of the recent "leaks" have supported that supposition. Especially the newest claim that DP was asked to check on K on May 3.
I can easily imagine K (under influence of substance or due to her own menstrual cycle or a combo of both?) could have become VERY AGITATED, infuriated, in a rage instantaneously - about anything - not only a child that will not cooperate - but also a husband who is not affected by emotion, and therefore more "mentally stable" and able to disconnect and enjoy his holiday at whatever cost - combine that with the pressure of the "holiday" where she was supposed to have a break, and M who was "hyperactive"... It does not take a large stretch of the imagination to see how an "accident" could have occured on the evening of May 3.
Anyway, I have gone through this in my head too many times to count, and I keep coming back to a desperate K and a savior mentality G. Their comments and actions have backed my assumptions to date.
The details still escape me, though I feel certain that I have some of them correct. I stand firm in my belief that more details will surface in the ocming months that can accomodate all the crazy pieces of this puzzle - whether it is via the Tapas group breaking down, or G himself.
Finally, I cannot post this without a small little comment for poor M. I bet she has visited K on many occasions, and I can only hope that she is giving her "her tuppence worth"...
Sorry if I have been too out there in the "cosmos" for some of you - but my science & medical knowledge are tempered by a belief of a very loving God, albeit on the periphery of everything we humans must face...
I've said "the truth will set you free" because I deeply believe that. Maybe that is what K felt as well, and why she had to talk to a priest ASAP the night of May 3...
Just my own thoughts - sorry if disjointed - this case has my mind spinning....
Who of you out there would go jogging the morning after you discovered your daughter missing? Strikes me as really bizarre!!
Another thing that has been nagging at me and is directed at any one who is Catholic and has been to confessional. Do any of you truly believe that (hypothetically speaking, naturally) if K&G had somehow been involved in an accidental death of M, would they have confessed such to the Priest? And if they had, why would he have turned around and given them keys to the Church? Wouldn't he have been horrified and gone to the police?
Another thing.
About the "Find Maddie" fund which has raised thousands of dollars to date. I'm hoping that someone has a record of the donators so they can all be reimbursed in case the McCanns are found guilty. These people donated money in good faith believing the McCann team story about a possible abduction and they deserve to be reimbursed.
Wouldn't he have been horrified and gone to the police?
Not if he takes his calling seriously and wants to remain a priest. Violating the Seal of the Confessional is punishable by excommunication, no matter what the circumstances.
And before anyone screams about how wrong that is... God's Law comes above and before all other laws, including the laws of man. It's more important (to Catholics) that people answer to God's Law than to man's law, and that includes confessing your sins and seeking absolution. If people can't trust their priest to lead them to God without turning them into the police, then the priests have failed in their one true duty.
The Seal of the Confessional is inviolable - if they did tell him anything (and I don't think they confessed anything more serious than guilt at leaving the children alone), we'll never know what it was.
24Horas Today:
In the dawn of the disappearance of Maddie, her parents changed of house
PJ allowed the McCanns to clean the apartment
In the dawn of the 4th of May, some hours after the disappearance of Maddie, the McCanns leaved the apartment where they were living and took all the goods they wanted. The modifications could have been fatal for the investigations and moreover it has been authorized by the Polícia Judiciária (PJ). In other words, a lot of evidences may have disappeared before the apartment was sealed by the authorities.
“It’s clear that the house should have been sealed. With everything in place and anything moved. But it wasn’t what happens. They carried everything to another apartment of the Ocean Club with everything they wanted and without any control of the authorities”, unburdened to the 24Horas a judicial officer close to the case. Still from this source, the disappearance of Maddie is “a case that promises to eternize in the time and the solution may never come and may never be revealed from the evidences that are collected and although it points to the involvement of the McCanns they are not conclusive.’
A high officer of the GNR has confirmed those facts to the 24Horas, nevertheless he affirmed that that police force has well acted: “After the alert, the squad came immediately to the place. It has only taken the time of the path from Lagos to Praia da Luz. So when they arrived in the place they realized that they were dealing with an eventual crime, whatever it could be, and called for the commander of the office, who immediately called the Polícia Judiciária. It was also asked immediately for sniffer dogs and the entire region has been combed. Besides it is truth that this dogs didn’t were trained to detect the sent of blood and putrefied flesh. They were looking for a live person.”
The same officer adds that “only one dog has signaled a scent of the disappeared toddler close to the apartment of the McCanns”, but the searches performed there by the militaries and the elements of the PJ were unfruitful as it is publicly known.
The investigators of the PJ believed that Maddie died in the rented house by the parents, but they are unable to explain how the body has been removed from the place where it was occulted until it has been, as it is assumed, carried in the Renault rented by the McCanns more than 20 days after the disappearance of the toddler.
The authorities suspect that this should have happen in the house of Robert Murat, the other arguido in the process, but the evidences are weak. According to the 24Horas, with the arrival of the new team directed by Paul Rebelo, the investigations, until yesterday, were only restricted to the analysis of the elements already collected by the investigators in the beginning of the polemical case.
Emma thank you for your compliments.
DC, absolutely right the Confessional is invioable (though in some countries this may not be so).
Emma in post 11.41 wrote about Kate being a type A personality. If so then I agree she wouldn't have made an admission to the priest. I think the church going business was over egged. A Priest would never reveal publically the contents of the confessional but there are other ways to get information to the police.
Someone with an excellent control of their emotions would have the inclination to go jogging the next morning. However it could be for other reasons which I won't go into because it's speculation.
er..so 24horas is suggesting that the mccanns disposed of madeleine's body in cahoots with Robert Murat? Why? How? etc?
Why would murat destroy his own life by helping them? why would the mccanns enlist his help?
Kate is now seeing madeleine's ghost ... and i thought they were convinced she was still alive?
Bonkers.
Sharon, re your question on the blonde woman in the light-colored trench coat...If it was Kate and it happened shortly before 10pm as reported (if true - ??) then there is no problem with the timeline as we know it. Perhaps if it was Kate she was trying to break open the window, maybe this effort failed due to the headlights or the height of the window. Shortly after that Kate raised the alarm. It is possible that it was Kate. That would be wild.
But eyewitness testimony is known to be the weakest in trials, it can change, people's memories are so fluid and fleeting and even whimsical to their own desires. What will make this case is what we are all waiting for and praying for - strong DNA evidence and other forensic evidence, each piece adding up to a strong case.
If only right?
If Kate did jog the next day why?????
I think there are two reasons -
1.To escape reality to get away from the nightmare
2.To check on her daughters body, if it were an accident, if it were that Kate was responsible, as a mother she still needs to make sure her baby is ok, regardless of circumstances leading to the death of Madeleine. When a parent causes their childs death especially when a mother does it, they have an overwhelming need to look after the body, to wrap it up safely, even if the child is dead as a mother you still want the child to be protected and safe. This is why many parents refuse organ donation of their deceased children. So Kate would need an excuse to get away to say goodbye to Madeleine and to check she was ok. To look at how long she was away would determine roughly the area that needed to be searched - even if she sprinted there and back it could logistically give a circumference of the area to look at - given she would need time with her daughter to say goodbye it is more likely to be nearer than further away.
Another point I would like to make is that people have criticised Kate as being "aggressive" towards her children. As a mother how many times have I been in a situation where my manic children have acted up and i have told them to sit down and have been faced with the screaming retort of I want my daddy and cries for daddy. I am a wonderful mummy and I am doing this to reprimand my children, to make sure they know right from wrong. Every child cries for the other parent when being told off. Imagine if you had three children running around and you had to shout to be heard - its not unnatural really is it. With languge barriers too and of course word meaning what exactly is meant by aggressive - raised voices - thats totally understandably - beatings??? we need to define what the "witness" terms by the meaning of aggressive first before we cast anymore aspertions on Kate.
The programme last night on C4 was just c4 spin really, they know know more than us it was just a viewers war, take heed re: the media everything they do is to make money not to get justice.
Lets wait and see what the forensic tests show.
One final thought, before I bore you all, I too remember the nanny thats was on C4 show last night saying she sorted out high tea, I am almost sure she said it was for Madeleine, why does it seem that everyone contradicts themselves in this case???
And fabulous news that Christopher Paul Neil has been arrested, great work by united police forces and interpol - a lesson learnt there that working together can produce results!!!
It's useful to re-read the articles published in the beginning of the case. Interestingly, the day after she disappeared (or that same night) a sniffer dog followed her scent for some 400 yards but lost it near a supermarket. Could that not be a sign that she wandered off and was taken by a local perp who took advantage of the situation?
Unfortunately, I could not see yesterday's channel 4 programme since I do not live in the UK. But judging from the comments posted above it strikes me as odd that the detectives don't believe in the 'wandering off' theory 'because it is likely she would have been found'. Why? I don't think it is likely at all. If she wandered off it could well be that a local perp saw his/her golden opportunity and took advantage of the siutation.
I'm not aware of the 'Chaplin dinner'. Could somebody enlighten me?
Sharon
Sorry one more point
i just read PDG's post re: Robert Murat - this niggles me every day i do think he is involved mainly because the person who acts as the "helper" the one everyone "loves" and thinks is "the heart of the community" the one who "goes that extra mile" in this case MR MURAT is normally the one who "burdens the guilt". I have no idea why there would be a link but I still hand on heart believe there is no smoke without fire and that Murat was involved. There was a definite sighting of him in PDL at the time Madeleine went missing yet he denies it makes me go hmmmmm.
I actually think that Mrs Murat is involved too, not sure if this is due to watching too many thrillers but I have a theory which involved Murat and his mother, a "corrupt" member of the PJ and a priest - all seems extreme but conclusions I have drawn have been from law reports I have read re: child pedophilia in Portugal.
Getting back on track I also want to point out that the priest saying he left in "despair" what would this interpret as in Portugal, here in the UK I think it would be that something was really wrong and he couldn't cope with what he had learnt, however as I mentioned in my previous post language interpretations are different and tend to confuse.
chaplins is a restaurant next to the church, about 5 or 6 minutes walk from the mark warner complex. Apparently they dined there on at least one of the nights of the holiday. Which would make their excuse about the tapas bar (it was like dining in our back garden, within bounds of reponsible parenting, blah blah) moot...
Interesting point about the jogging, 'looking after' the body etc
Yes if anybody had heard me yelling at my daughter, they could come up with similar accusations about me... none of us are perfect.
But I suppose it all adds to the picture.
The concern I have with Chaplins is that it wasn't confirmed that they all went.
Sharon - it was me who summarised the Channel 4 programme's "detectives" as coming to the view that it was unlikely M had just wandered off, because if she had she would likely have been found.
The "detectives" themselves were shown wandering downhill from the apartment to the entrance to the Ocean Club saying things like "people tend to walk downhill if they are lost" and when they arrived at the OC entrance they said "it's very bright, as it would have been on the night M went missing - but she wasn't seen or found here..." then they pointed out that she (alive or dead) had not been found but that if she had just wanredered off it would have been likely that someone would have found her. So they concluded wandering off was an unlikely hypothesis.
Like I also said - it wasn't really a very good programme. This was an example of why it wasn't very good. I was not endorsing a report of qualified expert analysis reported by a credible team of investigative journalists!
Reasonable Man I agree with just about EVERYTHING you say apart from you know what! Can I just add my comments to the already excellent and as one would expect from this thread, erudite comments on the Dispatches programme.
At first I thought I had made a mistake and was watching a repeat of Last of the Summer Wine. For those not in the U.K. the B.B.C. have been told to make cutbacks and are firing staff. It was then I realised it was not Combo, Clegg etc (which was a pity as Nora Batty is a sort of pin up for me) it was in fact the cast from New Tricks. Again for folk who are not local this is a series about retired police officers brought back to reopen unsolved cases. They vary in age between myself and pdx77, pretty bloody old really.
However in the series these men are witty, intelligent, computer savvy, and generally with it, this comes about because they have a script! These poor beggars could not even visit the crime scene. Channel 4 could have saved the air fares and sent them to a local blind making shop and road-side cafe. They by their actions and words, thank god, dispelled any suggestion that our plods (sorry boys in blue) would have had M back and the scoundrel apprehended before he stepped out of the apartment.
Why the hell would you send a profiler to a place where he cannot visit the crime scene and does not know what crime took place. I am just glad this was not the BBC as it was a total waste of time and money. As someone else commented they would have learnt more reading this thread than their much hyped journey ever gave them.
http://portugalresident.com/port...ry.asp?
ID=19001
Found this online... it reports on child abduction in the Algarve...
Its food for thought i think.
thank you, RM, for clarifying about the programme (we didn't miss much...) and thanks to PDG for your update on Chaplin's.
About the jogging on 4 May: I like jogging and have two kids myself. I just can't believe anybody in their right mind would take the time to go jogging the day after their child went missing. To paraphrase CM, 'it beggars belief'.
I would have frantically joined the search or cling to the police or do whatever possible to find her. Unless, of course, I already knew that the child is never going to be found alive...
I had a peruse back amongst old news about Madeleine when she was first taken. There was reports of a maid being questioned, what happened there, what was the outcome.
I also came across an article that states Murats aunt Sally Eveleigh works for an adoption agency, is this true? Far out thinking but it has been known before that children are trafficked through the guise of adoption agencies...perhaps i have simply just watched too many Columbo movies
Sky news are reporting that "Analysis of hair samples from two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie is said to show no evidence of sedatives"
Re Karina You said "In fact, any citizen is subjected to the justice secrecy law (art. 371 from the Portuguese Penal Code)."
This does not make sense. Look at all the blogs and newspaper articles on this case !!
Before reading what is following, I recommend that you lesson that BBC audio file about the ‘The Portuguese criminal justice system’ :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/progr...ion/
7046773.stm
In criminal proceedings, the justice secret is explained in the art 86 of the Portuguese Procedure Criminal Code (CPP):
http://www.dgpj.mj.pt/sections/
n...e=1188905479.76
From the art 86 n°1 of the CPP, it results as a rule that the phase of the inquiry is secret, and the phase of the trial is public and the "instruction" is also secret, only been public when it is exclusively required by the arguido if he declared that he is not against publicity.
The justice secret is constitutionally established in the art 20 n°3 of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic:
http://www.portugal.gov.pt/
Porta...ituicao_p03.htm
“The law shall provide for the definition and proper safeguarding of the secrecy of the investigation in the criminal proceedings.”
An inquiry is under secrecy and the arguido doesn’t have free access to the acts and also to the form that the evidences are collected.
To maintain the justice secrecy, punishment is used in the proceedings (art 371 of the Portuguese Civil Code).
You must distinguish two thinks: the justice secret in itself and the duties of the arguido concerning the justice secret that are defined in the art 86 of the CPP.
The art 86 n°5 and n°6 of the CPP says that the judicial authority can give information, documents, acts under justice secrecy to certain persons, if it is convenient for the establishment of the truth, and these persons are linked to justice secrecy.
Consequently and obviously, an arguido is subject to these law since he is a participant of the procedure.
But it also said that anybody who has been in contact with the process and has the knowledge of elements of the process is also subjected to the law. So anybody can commit a crime of violation of justice secret. How?
Let me give you an example: a journalist receives some documents concerning an inquiry subjected to justice secrecy. He published these documents in a newspaper. What would happen? He is neither an arguido nor a participant in the process. Well, in fact, he has committed a crime: a violation of the justice secret and naturally he would be sued and condemned.
Jose
thanks for the detailed explanation but I am still confused. Based on your last paragraph, it seems that 24Horas should be sued and attacked for publishing so many leaks and often misinformation.
The way I look at the situation, LEAKS are allowed but not the TRUE facts. People who don't want to talk invoke the secrecy laws but others have no problem making up stories
Questions for everyone ...
Assuming that Madeleine died in the apartment and assuming that one of the Tapa 7(OBrien or Payne) helped dispose of the body, where would they have hidden the body?
Did they have a car?
And when did Payne and OBrien fly back to the UK? How long did they stay after May3rd?
I am trying to figure out what they could have done with the body until it reappeared 25 days later in the rental car.
Any ideas?
I think the leaks are seen as hearsay and not fact hence not prosecutable, which is just more ridiculous than the way this case seems to be being handled.
@ Karina
I think the most obvious place to hide the body would be a suitcase - just for a short time - who would look there??? NOONE why would they?
A child's body decomposes a lot quicker than an adult body - the body to not decompose and smell would needed to be frozen realistically, everything about this case seems so far-fetched, it truly does.
I guess if I were looking to hide a body the best place to do this would be in a church yard and it just so happens they had the keys to do that.
I thought the most useful point about the Dispatches program was the footage of the many areas that a body could be hidden: wells, scrubland, rocky beach, large bins (yes I know they were emptied next day but could have been an initial resting place). All the rest we already knew.
Liz
Karina I have enquired on several occasions and no-one can say for sure if any of the group had a hire car on the night of 3rd. I agree O'Brian fits the time lines, and he changed all his clothing and his partner is the only person to have sighted the person carrying a child in pink pyjams. However what was done with the body is sadly a matter of pure conjecture. Unfortunately there are many options, the sea is still favourite in my book.
Someone asked how could K go jogging the next morning. Answer: God only knows, and some on this thread cannot understand my antipathy to this very strange lady. Two stone more, bigger boobs, still a fruitcake!
Ok, so you think it would have been buried and then dug up and placed in the car to be moved somewhere else?
@Lynn & pdg,
I totally agree about the so-called aggressive side of Kate. I also have three kids (youngest two very willsome twins!) and there have been moments when I'm extremely glad my sudden flash of frustrated shouting above their din haven't been overheard. Parenting three kids under four years of age is very hard work and if you're expected to be 'the perfect mother' on holiday and take charge whilst hubs enjoys himself, well that would just add to the frustration. I totally agree with the bit in Emma's post above where she describes their personality types, that's exactly as I see them.
Purely speculation but I think K has always been highly strung and not had the best of relationships with her Mother. I believe her Mother thinks this trait in K's personality is from her natural father's side (I am right here in that we don't know anything about him, or have I imagined this?).
K's Mother seems quite an outgoing and down to earth person who doesn't necessarily warm to the narcissistic side of K's nature, hence my belief that their's is a difficult relationship. If this is the case then it's not only a huge shame but a problem for any woman with young children - it doesn't look like K had any older female shoulder to lean on in the way that you can with your Mother, older sisters, Aunts. With her personality she would not have been able to show herself truly warts and all to her peers when her feelings of failure and frustration as a Mother were tearing her apart and fraying her life as it was at the edges.
Re Karina Ok, so you think it would have been buried and then dug up and placed in the car to be moved somewhere else?
If the body has been transported in the car after 25 days, the body couldnt have been buried - due to the putrefaction of the corpse.
The body must have been placed in a fresh place: a cave or in a fridge or put in a liquid and then it could haven buried or incinereated or destroyed.
ARMan,
I've just seen the youtube on that voice tech thing re: G's statment. 98% inaccurate? I'd like to see that run on all their interviews!!
I've just found this link to an article about the McCann's making a complaint to the PCC (Press Complaints Committeee) apparently it was lodged before the previous PR Rep for Team McCann left so it might not be pursued. Buy i haven't seen it anywhere else and it makes an interesting read:
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/
st...storycode=38942
Jose
You said
" The body must have been placed in a fresh place: a cave or in a fridge or put in a liquid and then it could haven buried or incinereated or destroyed."
That's why I am wondering when the McCanns' friends flew home. If the body was not buried for 25 days, I wonder where it was. If the friends had left Portugal, then the body could not have been kept in their apartment (refrigerated). After May3rd, the McCanns were under scrutiny and had NO car.
I am trying to come up with a plausible scenario re: the disposal of the body during these 25 days. I know it sounds so morbid. Sorry!
A fruitcake is really unfair i feel as she has lost a child, whatever the reason, this has happened to her and I am sure I would be the first to be a fruitcake and if all the media in the world were saying bad things about me I too am sure I would probably say something dumb.
RE: the body - if Kate did have to hide Madeleine then I think she probably put it in a suitcase, it isn't unusual to see people carrying suitcases around on holiday so i think perhaps this would be the ideal thing to do - why i am not sure - if i was guess i would have this case solved ah ha
I have been looking into the pedophilia that sweeps the world - my goodness it is horrendous, ranges from abusing to snuff - i guess i have lived a sheltered life, i didnt realise things like this went on.
I know death is final but my goodness i really hope Madeleine accidentally died at the hands of her mother than be subjected to what some of these monsters are capable of.
This gets me back to a point I wanted to make to Stanley - you say she is a fruitcake but she is probably (IF INNOCENT) at a point where she just needs a break - she knows she messed up big time and probably is having some form of breakdown but who wouldn't I think her actions cant be judged nor really can her words as I am sure we all would be fruitcakes.
Finally RE: The relationship with her Mother - I remember my mother saying to me OH My God if that was you and you had lost your daughter I would be there permanently, no matter what. This is true - why wasn't she there for Kate???? Makes me think that the relationship between them hasnt been the best.
@ STANLEY sorry my last post reads a bit odd - I certainly wasn't insinuating I thought you were a monster hope you don't read it like that.
Lynn,
Re: your suitcase idea
How do they keep the body in a suitcase for 25 days without it decomposing ?
Wouldn't the smell be awful?
If it was dumped in the sea right after death, how could they find DNA in the rental car ? (assuming that the DNA story is true).
@ Karina
Hey, I am not sure that they kept it in there that long but initially when the room was searched the night Madeleine went missing perhaps that's where she was. There wouldn't be a smell. They moved into another apartment so would have suitcases she could still have been in it then - I am not sure how long the time was between changing apartments but it is feasible to take a suitcase full of clothes and essential items with you. The body could then have been moved to a place where it could be left - water/freezer I am not sure - what sort of freezer was in the new apartment - chest freezers can hold a body. If the body was stored in acave or in the ocean I presume salt would soak into the body and this would show in the DNA.
Not sure what do you think???
Lynn,
hmmmmmmmm....yes, maybe a freezer in the new apartment ? how many days did they stay at the Ocean club before moving to the rented villa?
I guess it's a possibility but how can you live in a place with the body of your daughter in the freezer??
It boggles the mind.
K.
Yes true but how could you kill your child???
I am not sure if there was a freezer in the new apartment - there must have been - what was the time gap between apartments - need to look at that???
RE: the twins not waking either - no sedatives were found so i wonder would sleeping aids like phernegan or piriton show up in foresic tests - people use these medicines as sleeping aids i should point out they are not for that.
@ Lynn. Not to worry I have been insulted by experts! Me a monster, I'm not that loveable. It is interesting you used the phrase "needing a break" in regards to Kate. This immediately focused my mind back to the original thoughts I had on the McCanns. We are told that this was a family holiday. I also had 3 young children we took on holiday in fact as I said on an earlier thread when the youngest was 6 months we stayed in Sessimbra a lovely resort just outside Lisbon. We were in a hotel and spent all day with the children and put them in their room at night and ate in the hotel. The following years we rented villas had a siestsa and took the children out at night to restaurants (as did the Portuguese people). That was a family holiday. From what we know only of one day in this holiday not only did the children not have dinner with them even during the day they were put in a creche. How can this possibly be described as a family holiday or did K&G think that the children enjoyed the company of strangers to that of their parents.
There is a growing fad brought about by "celebs" Maddonna, Wacko Jacko , and the collection of body parts that is David Beckhams wife to name a few, who treat their children at best as fashion clothes horses and at worst as accessories. I really don't care about the biological relationships but I do care about the attention given to the children on this "family" holiday and if the stories about the Chaplin are true then their whole case (as far as negligence is concerned) is blown out the water.
Finally may I say that I am shocked that John & A Reasonable man have not admitted being in the Nora Batty fan club. Where have all the men of taste gone?
On a political point for a change, see below for link to PMs involvement:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5...h?
v=5dWcyZ5N1G8
Stanley steady ref. Norah Batty, loose tights (panty hose) on an OAP (old aged pensioner) oo err, is this 'Carry on up the Algarve' after all?
Totally agree with the family holiday post (can't not as have said the same myself repeatedly on this site). Bizarre behaviour from the whole T9 party IMO... Don't they get it - FAMILY HOLIDAY - the two words together. Not Adults 'n' Kids holidays seperately. One of the brighter reasons to holiday in Europe - they love kids eating out with parents and in my experience staff bend over backwards to assist you.
Stanley: Sorry dude, not a Nora fan either. I can see why you thought the guys in the Dispatches programme were like the codgers though. What I thought of was the fat detectives in the Fast Show. Anyway that's far too many pop culture references for the Yanks and possibly the other Europeans here too...
Yep...I have no idea what you people are talking about
K.
You don't want to know Karina and it is SOoo.. off topic.
Just a point on the "no sedation finding" in today's papers. Supposedly 2 different tests done by opposing sides with 2 different results. Wonder if both tests were testing for the same drug families? We don't know how broad a spectrum each test covered. So the tests that was reported today, showing no sedatives were from the McCann side??? There was not a mention of Maddy's hair sample.
"Portuguese newspapers have repeatedly alleged that hair samples from Kate and Gerry McCann's children show that the couple sedated Sean and Amelie, their two-year-old twins, and Madeleine, on the night that she disappeared.
"However, it is understood that the couple have since commissioned their own forensic tests, which found no traces of sedatives in hair samples from the twins.
A source close to the couple said: “Any legal team worth their salt would have these kinds of tests done. No evidence of sedatives were found in the twins' systems.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle2697257.ece
To some extent it will depend on what is meant by "sedative". I am no doctor but I don't think Calpol (which is a brand name for a suspension of paracetamol in syrup in doses appropriate for giving to children) is regarded - or possibly clinically defined - as a sedative, in Britain at least.
As a parent I have used it to treat children - killing pain and helping to reduce fever. I believe some people may use it to help their children sleep, as I understand that Calpol may cause drowsiness.
There have been reports of the McCanns stating that they have used nothing more than Calpol. In his famous tv interview Gerry denied using Calpol on the children that night (which he had been asked), and went on to specifically state that they had never used sedative drugs on the children (which he had not been asked).
Perhaps paracetamol is found, or perhaps not in the hair samples tested by either side. Perhaps other sedatives are found or not found. We cannot know.
This report has the status of spin as it was made by Clarence Mitchell.
I have found it odd that the twins apparently did not wake up through the whole incident of Madeleine's disappearance even when their beds and room were being searched. That suggests to me that they were very drowsy, and probably unnaturally so. It also suggests a reason why Kate McCann did not (because two unconscious flopping toddlers are much harder to lift than merely sleeping ones) remove the twins from danger when she "discovered" that their sister had been "abducted".
But that is just my impression, as a parent. I find the McCann story hard to swallow. Sedating your children or otherwise artificially ensuring your children are settled and sleeping for your own convenience is something I find problematic, and I also think it could fit with the pattern of behaviour of the McCanns on their holiday.
If evidence of sedation, or evidence of use of Calpol to increase drowsiness were discovered and proved, it would not *necessarily* of itself imply anything in relation to how Madeleine disappeared. She could have been killed, or had an accident, or wandered off, or been abducted whether or not she had been sedated or been given Calpol.
However, whether implicated in the disappearance of Madeleine or not, the McCanns will wish if possible to avoid any chance of being accused of administering sedatives to their own children. This would clearly be extremely problematic for their careers as doctors.
24Horas 20/10/2007:
While the expertises are still in delivery, the police has its hands tied
PJ despair for English tests
They hope and despair. The Portuguese authorities are outraged by their English congeners for the delay in providing the final expertise report ordered to the laboratory of Birmimgham concerning the disappearance of the little Maddie McCann in Praia da Luz, Lagos, Algarve.
These tests are fundamental to the progress of the investigations and as long as the Public Ministry and the PJ don’t have it in their hand, they could do nothing in this phase. “This week has been dedicated to the analysis of the evidences previously collected and the diligences on the ground were a simple routine. Or in other words, identify the zone where Maddie vanished. The truth is, it’s only with all the laboratory results that we will progress in the inquiry”, revealed to the 24Horas an officer from the Polícia Judiciária. A director from the Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal (INML) [National Institute of Forensic Medicine] has confirmed that the delay for the realization of the tests that were ordered-only DNA tests- should have been concluded a long time ago, in spite of the complexity of the case. “These tests are performed when there exist a lot of elements and when the quantities of the collected vestiges are important, in only two or three days. Nevertheless, in more complex situations, it is reasonable that such expertise takes 90 days (three months). In that case, the delay is fully expired and it’s strange that one the major forensic laboratory in the world still don’t have delivered the evidences to the authorities”, said that source from the INML.
It is certain that the team directed by Paulo Rebelo didn’t have succeeded to orientate the investigation towards their principal aim: locate Maddie, dead or alive.
The authorities hope now receive the results of all the expertise in the beginning of the next week, but, as it was reported by an officer within the investigations, “it could happen in one hour or in one month”.
Portuguese Experts Crime Scene Reconstruction
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/po...osts/view/
22605
Although I havent found yet the portuguese source of this information coming from a Portuguese TV show,
Paulo Sargento et al. have done a new scene reconstruction concerning the path from the apparment to the sea following the trail of the sniffer dogs.
"British sniffer dogs picked up the scent of a corpse, leading to the theory that Madeleine’s body could have been dumped in the sea close to the church or hidden nearby."
"Examining the two most likely routes, the experts concluded it would have taken “less than three minutes” to dispose of Madeleine’s corpse using a car driven at 20mph."
Former police inspector Fransisco Moita Flores said: “There are so many contradictory theories, but she was taken, dead or alive, according to the dogs, down to the church.
“This would have to have been done by car. There is a piece of land behind the church and behind that is the sea.
“A car could take you from the apartment to the sea in 30 seconds, whichever route was used.
Let’s say something went wrong, we have about 40 seconds. If you add two minutes to dispose of the body by sea – that’s little more than two and a half minutes at the most. It would take just another 30 seconds to return to the resort.
Mr Flores added: “That is more than enough time for any member of the group that left the table during that meal to be considered a suspect.
“Many of the group, according to what we’re told, was absent from that table – every one of them for more than three minutes.”
Mr Flores said it would have been impossible for a suspect to carry off Madeleine without being seen.
He said: “The little girl was removed and taken elsewhere – whether alive by an abductor or dead after an accident.
“In either case, to leave the apartment there are a lot of overlooking holiday properties.
“The risk to somebody carrying the child via either of those routes would be enormous. There would have been people in the streets and cars.”
Paulo Sargento said: “I am convinced that whatever happened happened within the McCanns and their group of friends.
“The reconstruction shows how unlikely it is that any other explanation could be possible.”
@ Stanley - glad you understood.
With regards to K needing a break i mewant from the devadtation around - perhaps she went for a jogto search for M
Interesting article today about the extend of the paedophile problem in Portugal. With detailed description what went on at Casa Pia. Quite horrible. I could cry thinking of those poor frightened kids!
Article says there is not obvious link to M's disappearance but because the problem is certainly present and not solved in Portugal it can't be completely ruled out that she was snatched by such a ring.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
pages...in_page_id=1770
Re Martine Interesting article with a new police theory. It's suggested that Kate killed Madeleine without telling Gerry, and that the body was "refrigerated" before being dumped up to 25 days later.
Is it possible that she hid the body alone without any help, May 3?
I just read this satire posted by SuspiciousMinds that sums everything up (except the new clothes, haven't read that one) so brilliantly! This is what the McCanns want(expect is a better word) us to believe. This is from back in Sept. so many of you may have read this. It is long so I have to post in parts.
PART 1:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
pag..........ge_id=1770
[quote]"I cannot believe Murat is no longer being investigated," said a source close to the McCanns.
"He is lying about being there on the night. They cannot understand why it hasn't been followed up why Murat lied. Kate and Gerry are being scapegoated." [/quote]
Perhaps they're too busy following up all the lies that Kate and Gerry have told from day one?
1) The shutters were jemmied open. What's that, Mr. Policeman? They weren't? Oh yeah, I remember now - we left the door unlocked so our friends could check on our children more easily when it was their turn.
2) What's that? Our friend's mother says that all the members of the party were only checking on their own children? Oh yeah, I forgot. We left the door unlocked in case there was a fire, so that Madeleine could rescue her siblings and get them out of the building if necessary.
3) Oooh, it was definitely an abduction. There's no way that Madeleine could have got out of the room on her own. Obviously if there had been a fire, she'd have acquired temporary super-human strength in her panic and managed it, but that didn't happen.
4) The tapas bar? Oh that was only a stone's throw from the apartment. We could see everything that went on. It was like having dinner in our back garden. Well, Robert Murat's back garden then. Anyway, we were checking on them regularly every 15 minutes.
5) What's that? The checking times don't match up with our friends'? Damn...oh no! Wait - I remember now! We were only checking on them every half an hour - but that's still well within the boundaries of responsible parenting. I mean, come on. Everyone does this on holiday with their children. Anyone who doesn't is an overprotective lunatic whose children should be taken away by Social Services for their own good. And Madeleine was definitely in there when Gerry checked at 9.05 p.m.
6) Well, actually Mr. Policeman, I'm not TOTALLY certain that Madeleine was in there at 9.05 p.m. - I mean, I looked in the room and I saw the twins, and I noticed that a door was open that hadn't been opened before. But I just assumed Madeleine had gone into our room because she got fed up with the twins crying. I mean, I didn't bother actually going in the apartment to make sure she was OK or anything. Why would I? She's old enough to look after herself - for goodness' sake she was almost four. How will children ever learn independence if they have their parents checking up on them every five minutes?
"Is it possible that she hid the body alone without any help, May 3?"
So much is possible - I don't know what to believe anymore.
I hope they either find someting soon, or the forensics will finally give a clearer result.
I have speculated for months, turned the whole case over in my head so many times, I'm feel spent right now.
Do you feel similar?
PART 2 - From SuspiciousMinds
7) Hmmm? What's that? It's a bit odd that the twins never woke up through all the commotion that was going on in the apartment? Did we ever sedate them? What a ludicrous suggestion. They're two years old - sleep through anything, they will. Apart from when they deliberately wake up and cry to annoy Madeleine, obviously.
8 ) Why didn't we use the resort's babysitting services when they were offered to us? Well, we didn't want to leave the poor children with a bunch of strangers all evening - what kind of cruel, heartless people do you think we are? What's that? You've heard we left them with those same strangers all day every day during our stay in Praia da Luz? Well, it was our holiday too. We had to have a break. And anyway, it's all right to leave your children with strangers in the daytime - we do that all the time at home. Leaving them with other people at night-time as well would be excessive - so we thought they'd be better off on their own.
9) How did we know immediately that Madeleine had been abducted and not somehow got out on her own? Well, we've already told you Madeleine could only have got out of that room if there had been a fire. And, anyway, Cuddle Cat had been put on a shelf out of her reach. Kate noticed that immediately - well, you would. Your daughter's gone missing, you're frantically searching the apartment for her - of course you'd immediately twig the location of her favourite toy and run screaming back to the table that she'd been taken. What's that? Kate told the press she couldn't remember when she first realised Cuddle Cat had been moved? Oh...er...well...she's still very upset. Distraught mother and all that. Doesn't know what she's saying.
10) Why did Kate leave the twins alone in the apartment again when she realised Madeleine had been taken? Oh she just panicked. The twins were fine - they were fast asleep. As usual. She didn't want to disturb them by calling me on my mobile. Anyway, we needed her to come running back to the table screaming, "They've taken Madeleine" so that there would be lots of witnesses who would be able to attest to our presence in the bar all evening. Just in case any corrupt policemen try to fit us up later in the investigation, obviously.
11) You've detected a death scent in our apartment? No-one else has ever died in that apartment? The body must have been there for at least two hours for the dogs to have detected that smell? You've found traces of blood in the apartment too? None of this is evidence that Madeleine is dead. It's all rubbish, I tell you. Madeleine is alive, and we need people to keep on giving us money...er...looking for her. All this talk of forensic evidence is hurtful and unhelpful - we will keep on insisting that Madeleine is alive until we are blue in the face...as was Madeleine the last time I saw her, actually...
12) Oh for Heaven's sake, what now? Not that flipping dog again! OK, so now i
PART 3 - From SuspiciousMinds
13) Now those blasted dogs have found the death scent on the car keys and Kate's clothes? (Must make a mental note to ask the fund directors if assassinating dogs is a reasonable use of fund money...) Well, it's obvious - Kate is a GP and she dealt with at least six decomposing corpses in the weeks before we left for Portugal. The scent obviously transferred onto her clothes and then onto her keys. And Cuddle Cat. Which, as a caring Catholic, she also took to work to comfort decomposing corpses. This is a witch hunt. We will stay in Portugal indefinitely to clear our names.
14) What's that? Kate bought the clothes in question AFTER Madeleine had disappeared? Oh...er...sh*t...let's go home to Leicestershire now...
15) It's ridiculous that we've got Ł800,000 sitting in a bank account and we're not allowed to use it to defend ourselves against these outrageous accusations, for which the Portuguese police have not got even the tiniest shred of evidence for. We are going to ask the company directors if we can use it. Oh p** - they said no. Oh, we never had any intention of asking for money from that fund - of course not! What a ridiculous suggestion - we were just going to set up a different fund altogether so that more gullible, poor people can pay for the privilege of helping us keep our lovely, six-bedroomed house instead of having to sell it to pay the best lawyers in the country.
16) We have invited Leicestershire Social Services round for a nice cup of tea and a bun. We did this because we are responsible, loving parents, and all responsible, loving parents invite Social Services round to check on their children after they've been on holiday. It's perfectly normal. Why would they come round for any other reason? It's not as if we've done anything wrong.
17) Oh no, here we go again with the forensic evidence. Excuse me while I stifle a yawn. Yes, yes, yes – we know about the death scent. Look, Kate got it wrong about those casual holiday clothes that she thought she’d worn to work. Actually, the scent must have come from that large bag of meat that we bought with the fund money and were saving for our ‘Welcome Home’ party – er…I mean Madeleine’s welcome home party. Well, as you know, she didn’t come home but Kate couldn’t bear to part with the meat just in case. But, you know, it’s hot in Portugal – the meat started to rot and was attracting flies and cadaver dogs and stuff… So Kate decided there was nothing for it, and heaved that huge sack of putrid flesh into the rental car and drove it ten yards down the road to the nearest bin. Of course the smell transferred to just about everything she touched – what do you expect?
Part 4 - from SuspiciousMinds
18 ) And the bodily fluids in the boot of the car? Well, that would be the twins’ dirty nappies. They have huge sentimental value for Kate – she’s such a devoted and loving mother. That’s why we had to have a six bedroomed house, you know – needed somewhere to display all those precious mementos of childhood. Or the fluids could have come from Maddie’s dirty pyjamas – Kate couldn’t bear to wash them, so she stored them in with the spare tyre to keep them safe. Along with Maddie’s sweaty sandals. That poor kid had a chronic B.O. problem. It was like sweat haemophilia – she just kept on perspiring and the stuff never dried, either. Weeks later, her clothes and shoes would still be dripping with the stuff. Weird.
19 ) DNA? Look, chum, we had thirty people in that car. Not all at the same time, obviously. But you know what? Every single one of those people has got DNA! Duh! So how the hell are you supposed to tell whether it’s Madeleine’s or anyone else’s? Come off it, matey, next you’ll be trying to claim that everyone’s DNA is unique. What do you take me for? There’s a perfectly innocent explanation for everything that the police found in that car. Now if you’ll just tell us exactly what they DID find, we’ll be able to get our stories straight once and for all instead of groping around blindly in the dark trying to cover every conceivable eventuality.
20) You know what? I’d LOVE to take a lie detector test. Firstly because I know that the Portuguese police wouldn’t be allowed to use the results as evidence in court anyway, so they won’t do it. Secondly because we’re not allowed to talk about the facts of the case to anyone else due to Portuguese secrecy laws, so nobody else will be allowed to ask us any pertinent and revealing questions anyway. And thirdly because our new PR bloke advised us that this was a good thing to say as it might have the effect of persuading a few gullible Jeremy-Kyle-watchers that we don’t have anything to hide and are therefore completely innocent.
21) We felt like we were being watched that whole week that Madeleine went missing. It was really creepy – just a feeling that someone was watching our movements and planning to take one of the children. Hmmm…what’s that? Why did we leave the children alone in an unlocked room every night then? Well, hey come on. We didn’t even have to think about leaving them alone – it just felt so safe, you know?
Part 5 - From SuspiciousMinds
22) I reckon the abductor was hiding in the apartment when I went to check on the children. You know I said I saw that a door was open when it hadn’t been before? Well I reckon the abductor heard me coming in and didn’t have a chance to close it again in case I saw him. So I went in and closed the door and came back out again. If only I’d gone through that door, I could have caught him! What’s that? If I went into the apartment anyway to close the door, why didn’t I just go into the next room and double-check to see if Madeleine was there? Ummm…oh that’s right – I remember now. She WAS in her bed at 9.05 p.m. – silly me. I did see her after all. Anyway, I bet when that intruder heard me go, he realised that he only had a few minutes to escape – even though I’d only just checked the children and he’d been monitoring our movements and knew that no-one would be back for half an hour. So in his panic, he dashed back into the room I’d just vacated, grabbed Madeleine (who didn’t wake up or scream or anything, despite not being sedated), jumped out of a smallish window, saw Jane Tanner and vanished. It’s so simple. The police must be total i***** not to have figured this out – my mates and I sorted it all out ages ago.
23) I cannot believe Murat is no longer being investigated. He is lying about being there on the night. We cannot understand why it hasn't been followed up why Murat lied. We are being scapegoated. Our friend definitely saw him carrying Madeleine back towards his house – there’s no doubt about it, now she’s remembered he wasn’t heading for the supermarket after all. If only Jane hadn’t been so sensitive and sweet in not mentioning it to Kate at the time in case it worried her, you could have had him red-handed. And all that stuff you found in the car? I bet you got the labels mixed up and mistook his car for our one – typical bl**dy incompetent foreign police. What’s that? You’ve cleared him? Oh…er…yes, actually we’re really happy about that. Cheers us up no end, that does, being the only official suspects in the case. Good on him. Jolly pleased. Ummm…
Last edited by SuspiciousMinds on Sun Sep 23, 2007 5:04 pm; edited 4 times in total
PART 6 - SuspiciousMinds
SuspiciousMinds answering critics to the post:
Ohhh, how insensitive and cruel of me to catalogue all the contradictions that Team McCann have come out with in the last few months! Crying or Very sad How could I ever have thought that innocent parents would give a straight and truthful story right at the beginning, and would not constantly change their minds about what happened? How could I have wanted to highlight their duplicity and untrustworthiness, instead of blindly accepting the latest version? My heart is breaking... Twisted Evil Twisted Evil Twisted Evil
P.S.
Yes, I do have a child - a gorgeous three year old son. If he was unlucky enough to be abducted, I would not lie about the events leading up to his disappearance or refuse to answer questions from the police. Do you not think that, had the McCanns given satisfactory answers to those 40 questions, the police would have lost interest in them by now and be concentrating on looking for Madeleine again? By their own actions, they have perpetuated the story of their guilt - whether true or not. If they don't like the outcome, it is no-one's fault but their own.
Martina 11:53am
Yes, Martina, I am also tired of trying to come up with a likely scenario to prove that the McCanns disposed of the body of their daughter. I want the DNA results NOW!!
Dee
What is Suspicious Minds?
It's a satire which really turns me off. It does raise some interesting points but I don't like the tone of the writing.
Dee
It is really brilliant. One reads this and just just thinks ... yes they did it.
Something went wrong and on not telling the truth immediatly, to protect tmeselves and their carreers, they are now in a big imbroglio.
BUT if those results from the tests, that the lab is STILL making, are inconclusive, they will get away with it.
"Examining the two most likely routes, the experts concluded it would have taken “less than three minutes” to dispose of Madeleine’s corpse using a car driven at 20mph."
JOSE,
I am wondering why all these darn journalists can't find out if the McCanns' friends had a car.
We know the McCanns did NOT.
I have asked that question many times and nobody has the answer. A good reporter should be able to find out this information. Also how long did the friends stay in PDL after May3rd?
Maybe one of them will read this thread and give us the answer
From the same article in The Daily Express
Former Police Inspector Mr. Flores said:
“The little girl was removed and taken elsewhere – whether alive by an abductor or dead after an accident.
wow...that statement really clarifies everything, doesn't it? Over 5 months of investigation and that's all a police inspector can come up with ?
@ Karina: As I said before I have been trying to find out the hire car situation from the beginning and cannot understand why nobody has the info. On the Suspicious Minds, sorry but I admire the style of writing how else do you destroy the sanctimonious, self-righteous claptrap of team McCann? As I have always maintained I do not know what happened exactly to Madeleine but I do know she was let down by incompetent, self interested parents. In their situation if they had not tried to justify their behaviour there would be no ammunition for Suspicious Minds.
Glad you liked it Marilia, sorry Karina or if anyone is offended.
Jose, I can't figure why journalists haven't asked if printed one way or the other if one of the friends had a car. I am betting they did as why would the "experts" bother to bother if they had no access to a vehicle?
Regarding the friends, their is video showing the Paynes in PDL a number of days later. My understanding (can't remember if this was in the paper or from a "board" so take this with a pound of salt) R.O'B & J.T. left as scheduled the next day.
Karina, "Former" Inspector suggests he's not privy to all the facts.
I heard in annorak forum that one of them had a blue Renault, but never saw anything in the press about that.
Re Suspicious Minds, to be sarcastic is not brilliant imo. I find that piece of writing quite insulting, and many times also stupid and wrong. The writer is twisting and mincing words. Anybody can do that, what's so brilliant about it?
I'd rather have an unemotional, open minded discussion, as it is mostly taking place here.
Sorry, Dee, I can't warm up to it.
Karina: Actually in my view the Suspicious Minds piece is rather well written: the author may only be a satirist - but I would not be surprised if some of the questions and answers they have imagined above were not very, very close to the truth.
I know some people feel very emotional about this case, but it will not be solved by people's feelings - for example about the tone of a comment or article - only by finding out facts.
It is fact in this case that something really rather bad has been done to a little girl; whether she is found alive or dead, or never found at all. We don't know yet what this actually is - and we don't know whether or not her parents are implicated.
However, it is clear that her parents did at least one very bad thing on the night of May 3 - and that was to leave the little girl and her brother and sister alone in a room while they went to a restaurant to eat and dink with their friends. I think that's a fact - thought Mrs and Mrs McCann always appear to have difficulty in just accepting it. They say they feel terrible - but they also say they think of themselves as responsible parents. I don't think anyone else can possibly think that they were responsible on the basis of the evidence - inclduing their own evidence - about how they left, neglected, abandoned, whatever you will, their children on that night (and seemingly other nights too).
The tone of the Suspicious Minds satire is the least of their or our worries. A reasonable man might judge in a court of law that it was fair comment - or as the "veritas" defence in libel cases here in Scotland would be argued: it was true. Not only did they leave their children in harm's way, but since then they have undermined their own credibility by stretching our credulity with a number of actions and statements quite well summarised in the posts above.
My own interest in the case - which after all is otherwise just a story of a child going missing which happens all too often and with much less interest by those not directly involved - was piqued more or less the day afterwards when the police pointed out that the window, which the McCanns friends and relatives said had been opened from outside, could not have been opened from outside. Someone was telling lies, and that usually means someone is covering something up.
I can wait for the McCanns to come up with a believable account of what happened. If I was them I would have told the whole truth on day one, which I am pretty sure they haven't yet done.
As a reasonable man, I am prepared to keep my mind open as to what happened, since truth is often stranger than lies. Meanwhile we also wait for the forensics to come up with evidence which might point the way to a more complete and more truthful account than we have had so far.
At present I think it most likely the little girl died on May 3, in or around the apartment and that someone has disposed of her body and tried to cover up the death.
I
"I know some people feel very emotional about this case, but it will not be solved by people's feelings - for example about the tone of a comment or article - only by finding out facts."
Reasonable Man,
I totally agree with you and I would venture to say that I am one of the least emotional people on this thread. I did not like the tone of the satire. I don't even know what Suspicious Minds is. Just because I don't like the article does not mean that I am not interested in the facts.
Sofar, all of you who believe that the child died in the apartment, are not able to come up with a REASONABLE explanation as to what happened to the body.
K.
adds...
I am sorry to say that I believe we can wait for as long as we need to, since I don't think the outcome of the case will be the discovery and rescue of a live Madeleine McCann.
Hello mates, just recovered from a dodgy hard drive (very expensive) and return to find that essentially nothing has moved on. A short gap from obsessively following this case on here has made me feel more circumspect about everything and has dampened my increasing McScepticism. Something one of the detectives said on the 'Dispathces' programme about the press coverage (that the FSS would never comment on a live case) made me think that we have indeed been fed even more rubbish than I previously thought.
Anyway to continue the tradition, just read this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
pages...in_page_id=1770
in which it says this:
"Mr Sargento, from Lusófona University in Lisbon, cross-checked the times of events from a number of sources from 4pm - when Madeleine was picked up kindergarten - until 10pm, when her mother Kate reported her missing."
4 pm???? thats the first time I've heard that time mentioned.
Will this case ever be solved? beginning to doubt it - the only winners lawyers and journalists.
Don't like the Seriousminds - Ubersceptic approach - and would like to return to our sober discussion of facts.
I would mention the 40 questions - but hey I think I might have already said that.
LOL@JohnUK
I think we all have our own special obsessions on this case. Yours is the 40 questions and mine is the disposal of the body.
Karina: I disagree - I think there have been numerous plausible theories about he disposal of the body: suitcase; refrigeration; burial nearby - eg at church; dumping at sea or in a lake etc etc... as well as plenty of possible but less plausible theories.
We don't have much hard information about the forensics, so I have an open mind on these methods of disposal.
Madeleine has vanished from the apartment and her body did go somewhere - no matter how complicated a route it took.
Putting myself in the position of the person having to dispose of the body, I think I would make sure it ended up in the Atlantic Ocean.
The body may never be found, which would make a prosecution on killing or disposal very difficult.
However, if the forensics do turn out to show that her body was dead in or around the apartment it is very hard to see how the parents could not be implicated.
That seems to me to be the most difficult thing to account for... not how a body may have been hidden and transported out of an apartment.
" ... made me think that we have indeed been fed even more rubbish than I previously thought."
That's what I think too. And since we are in no position to filter out the few titbits of truth in this maze of lies I recently found myself at a point where I feel tired to lap up everything that's presented to us and end up with a migraine trying to make sense of it all.
Anyway, nice to have you back from hard drive hell, John!
A reasonable man
The plausible theories that you mentioned are not plausible to me IF we find out that there was a dead body in the trunk of the car 25 days later.
I can see the disposal of the body on May 3rd but not 25 days later.
As I said in my prior post, we all emphasize different aspects of the case.
I am wondering about something else.
Let's say the PJ does not have enough evidence to arrest and prosecute the McCanns, does it mean that they will never divulge whatever evidence they had on the case?
Karina when you said, "I would venture to say that I am one of the least emotional people on this thread" you must be forgetting you, yourself said "I tummy ache every time I think about the parents being involved." Not that there is anything wrong with that, if this case didn't pull on heartstrings, trying to find a logical answer where or why this poor child is missing, etc. Unfortunately we would not be here everyday, nor would the papers be constantly writing, recycling, etc. if this story did not touch people's emotions in my opinion.
So far as we "are not able to come up with a REASONABLE explanation as to what happened to the body", there have been many, many very reasonable explanations as to what could have happened to the body from the PJ, and
people on this board; however no proof (body for example).
SuspiciousMinds is a person who wrote a satire and it is what it is. I felt it was brilliant in the respect of how their story keeps changing and putting the story in context to earlier statements together, displays how their explanation doesn't make sense logically.
Karina, now tell us your thoughts and theories, you must have some theories; abduction for instance what, when, who, how? I am asking your opinion in all honesty, you must have some kind of opinion or theories by this point.
I agree with you Karina on "the plausible theories that you mentioned are not plausible to me IF we find out that there was a dead body in the trunk of the car 25 days later." I never say never, but I could almost make an exception on this theory!
Didn't I read somewhere that one of the Tapas 9 had a fridge replaced at some point during their stay? Perhaps the original fridge, the one they claimed was broken, was hidden and used to keep the body in.
"burial nearby - eg at church"
I think that ground is far too hard to dig a hole there quickly, or anywhere else in the area for that matter. Doesn't look like soft moist earth from what I can see on photos and people living not in the Algarve but not far have been saying the same.
I doubt she's buried somewhere. If she died there that night, she either ended up in the ocean or for example in that lake which they are searching now (do they?).
But ocean seems most likely to me too.
Dee,
I always thought I was pretty clear re:my opinion.
I am quite willing to consider that the McCanns are involved. I have tried and tried to come up with a likely scenario where they could have accidentally killed Madeleine and hid the body.
I agree that the McCanns and the Tapa7 are not telling the whole truth.
On a scale from 1 to 10 regarding the guilt of the McCann, I would be at an 8.
Therefore I am not 100% convinced that they are guilty. If DNA results from the rental car show that a corpse was transported, then the 8 will become a 10.
I don't agree with the condemnation of the McCanns based on their looks, their body language, their fund raising skills, their connections with rich people, or their well-known attorneys.
K.
Dee,
I thought the Suspicious Minds piece was very entertaining. Excellent writing, I must agree. And when it's all laid out like that, it does make the McCanns look pretty foolish.
Well said Karina, thanks for your opinion.
@ Dee: I think what detractors of the Suspicious Minds piece object to is not the ridiculous verbal quagmire, they so wittily recount, in which G is drowning. That was caused as Reasonable Man points out because he did not tell the whole truth in the first place. No it is because the piece points the verbal finger at the financial meanderings of Team McCann, which have been inappropriate to put it mildly.
Billie
A fridge replacement? that's interesting. I don't remember reading anything about it.
I can buy the idea of a body being placed in a fridge but not the McCann's fridge. So if it's in somebody else's fridge, we need to know how long the Tapa friends stayed at the complex.
Ok John, back to the case. Going with the suitcase theory. If Maddie was in the apt. (sorry to have to be graphic) dead for a period 2 hrs. (perhaps less for a number of reasons), it would not be unreasonable to assume someone covered her with a blanket. After it was agreed (foreign country, careers, twins, etc.) perhaps nothing good can come of this, she was put in a suitcase. In the interest of space in the suitcase or perhaps the blanket was from home, "Maddy's favorite, like C.Cat" didn't get packed in the suitcase for space reasons or identification purposes back to them, but later was in the car at some point. It could have been hidden under the carpet or perhaps a drink or something liquid spilled on it to cause leakage to the underside of the carpet.
It irks me to no end why we don't have a simple answer to the question; did one of the friends have a car? If not perhaps Maddy was transported in a stroller with the cover put down or a blanket over top of her; the carriage being returned with the blanket. It also not very far (to the sea, church roadworks or bins) that she could have been carried.
Dee,
The stroller makes sense, yes. How does one make sure the body does not resurface? It must have been weighed down with something.
I find the whole thing bewildering and that everything about this case is too extreme. Sometimes the simplicity of a situation is overlooked by trying to piece together all the facts - sometimes things are irrelevant and do not have to add up.
We do know they went out and left the children alone - we do not know if Madeleine was alive or dead when they left - lets look at this point first.
If your child was dead could you go to bad, sit, eat and then return back to check on her - realistically i think not. I therefore think that rules out the death before returning to find she had gone.
I do think she was "checked" on but again as i previously have pointed out they "listened" rather than "saw" the children. This would account for the fact they didn't know anything was wrong until 10pm when Kate checked.
Therefore, we need to establish when Kate realised Madeleine had gone - how long was she away - if she was away long enough to hide the body in suitcase (i am sure this is where she would do this) but would she be able to compose herself long enough to think logically??? this is where i have the doubt. As a mummy if i had killed my child i couldnt function to cover it up at all - doctor or not!!!
SO when Kate went back to the Tapas7 - who came back to the apartment with her???? IF it was just Gerry then they could have hid the body together BUT Kate had been hysterical shouting and running around when she realised Madeleine wasn't there WHICH therefore leads me to believe that Kate wouldnt draw attention to the fact Madeleine was missing if she was lying in the apartment dead.
I still cannot believe the twins slept through all this but then again last night my daughters wardrobe collapsed and she didnt stir - perhaps children are that heavy sleepers
not convinced about the stroller the mccanns were well known - wouldnt people be suspicious of them pushing a stroller with a child all covered up
Lynn going with your theory, let's work this out. Kate had never looked in at the children since arriving at the resta/bar by all counts. Assuming Kate didn't know and her reactions were genuine, there would be no body to have to dispose of after the fact. So Kate would not have known what happened to Maddy at that point. For transfer to have happened to her clothes she could have clung to the blanket or Maddy in grief. What clothes was she wearing in those days as it wouldn't necessarily have to have been that night if it was a blanket or c.cat? Further you ask who came back with her; basically everyone and their dog and that resulted in a lot of the forensic problems, etc.
Regarding your first point "If your child was dead could you go to back, sit, eat and then return back to check on her - realistically i think not." Normally, I would agree with you, however remember this is the same Mommy who left them alone,went jogging the next day, her & Gerry went out at 6:00 in the morning looking for her; how did they know there would be no ransom phone call? These were the same doting parents that left their kids at the cretche the next day, when a so-called abductor was loose in the small town. I wouldn't let my kids out of my site and would also want the comfort of knowing they were safe with me! So Lynn with all due respect these parents behavior as displayed in the aftermath is out of the ordinary and gives food for thought could they have gone for supper knowing?
I believe they must have hidden M in their apt or in one of the T9s. At least for some days assuming the DNA they found in the trunk is hers. In order to bury her somewhere, lets say on the beach or close to the church you need a good knowedge about the area and of course something to dig a hole in a ground. Usually you wont find a spade in a holiday appartment.
And if you are in a hurry -with or without making the way by car you need more than 3 minutes.
In the mirror forum someone posted a theory about "what must have happened". He or she made some very interessting points, which I havent considered so far. The bottom line is, that M died already on the 2nd.
Anyways, I dont want to copy it in here, it is too long, but worth reading. I hope the link works this time.
http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewt...der=asc&
start=0
Three points:
1. IT is still hard to swallow that after an accidental and devastating death you could carry on regardless no matter who you were = unless a psychopath i guess
2. Everyone coming back to the apartment has to mean Madeleine was abducted or hidden previously to this - see my point above.
3. My final theory is that perhaps Madeleine died pre going to the Tapas bar - twins sleeping, none the wiser, kate and gerry panic, try to revive Madeleine and cant so decide to do the only thing they can and bury her - they both then plan to go to dinner as normal - allow others to check on kids in the hope one finds she has gone = but again could they act normal - i just cant see it.
I don't see why everyone is having such a difficult time imagining G&K "acting normal" that fateful evening. I think it's reasonable to assume that something happened in their apartment to cause M's accidental death, and, after some initial panic and subsequent quick planning i.e. hiding the body and staging the scene, they fell into autopilot mode and carried on, knowing that they had to pull this one off. People often don't immediately fall apart in panic situations.
Desperate times call for desperate measures.
What I cannot fathom is how some of you cannot grasp that concept. Once the decision was made to hide the accidental killing, K & G had to adhere to the (hastily concocted, see the 23 points above) plan.
Why do some of you call for a "plausible" or "reasonable" explanation for this mess?
Sometimes, the unthinkable happens. It may seem implausible, or unreasonable - but it happnes every day, in all of our lives.
Come on. Suspend your disbelief for a second and remember that stranger things do, in fact, happen constantly.
We are only human, and humans are animals, too.
@Billie
that is true but come on you kill your child and then act like lifes great - they are a normal family who are on holiday - they are part of the mafia and this isnt a movie - i just cant buy it.
Lynn,
I never thought of the McCanns as a normal family on holiday. I'm simply suggesting that they did what they felt they had to do in order to hide M's death in order to save their own hides. Their self-preservation instinct kicked in and they pulled it off, at least for now.
I understand what you were saying Billie all I am stating is it would take something i cannot comprehend to hide the death of your child so convincingly under all that pressure and not give any hint. when witnessed were asked if they saw the tapas7 i read one witness said they were laughing joking and drinking lots - just doesnt strike me as something many if any could do
"I never thought of the McCanns as a normal family on holiday."
Billie,
I felt the opposite. I thought the McCanns were a normal family on holiday and that's why it's so hard to believe that they are capable of this Oscar-winning type of acting.
Pretending to have a good time and drinking wine when their daughter was dead !!
Lynn,
I think if they truly feared that 1)they might go to prison 2) they would lose the twins 3) their respective reputations and careers would be ruined, they opted for the staged coverup. Like Emma said, "desperate times call for desperate measures". And this was surely the most desperate of times. Too much was at stake, they had worked too long and hard to get where they were financially, socially and career-wise, and they weren't going to allow M's death to ruin everything for them.
Just my humble opinion, based on the little I have come to learn about the two of them.
Billie's 1, 2, 3 would be sufficient motive to decide on a cover up and stage the abduction.
http://tinyurl.com/2b23vw
Well, here is yet another retired Police Chief's opinion. This one believes in the abduction theory.
If it's evidence of the capability of the McCanns for dissimulation (and even self deception) which is required, then this below is from the report published in The Times on 26 May of their well known tv interview with Sky News.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle1843296.ece
This is where Gerry says it was like having "dinner in your garden". And where Kate says twice "we are very responsible parents".
I don't know any more than anyone else if either of them killed Madeleine or disposed of her, however I do think that the people who could go on tv and say these things on the basis that their daughter had been abducted on their watch and expect to be believed would be capable of deciding to cover up any misdemeanour on their part, small or large.
They confronted their interviewers as they raised the subject, which has coloured public debate on the case, as to why they left their children alone in the first place, dining at a nearby tapas bar.
"I think it's fair to say that the guilt that we feel, having not been there at that moment, irrespective of whether we had been in the other bedroom or not, will never leave us," Mr McCann said.
"Certainly the first few days the guilt was very difficult," his wife added. "Looking at it from where we are now," she said, "I don't feel we were irresponsible. I feel we are very responsible parents, you can't help but have emotions like that."
Mr McCann said: "For us, it wasn't very much different to having dinner in your garden, in the proximity of the location. We're in a very safe resort. If you think about the millions and millions of British families who go to the Mediterranean every year, the chances of this happening are in the order of a hundred million to one."
Mr McCann added: "Any criticism of us at this time is hard to take. But so many people have done the same thing in such a safe resort. Had we been in the bedroom next door we would still have felt guilty." Mrs McCann seemed momentarily to falter, her voice falling to a whisper when she told how panic had set in the moment they discovered Madeleine was missing. But she quickly recovered: "I think at worst we were naive. I mean we're very responsible parents. We love our children very much."
and here an article by Liz Hunt who criticizes Enright's piece on the McCanns.
http://tinyurl.com/yt3c7t
It seems that some people still feel that the McCanns are innocent. I hope they are but as I said earlier, I have some serious doubts.
K.
A reasonable man,
I fail to understand your outrage at these comments. You think they did not show enough remorse for leaving the kids unattended and then you deduct from these comments that they could have staged the abduction ?
This is hardly the kind of evidence that will convince me that the McCanns are guilty.
Not outrage, not accusing them of lack of remorse even. Just pointing out that the McCanns appear to be prepared to dissimulate. Anyone who leaves their kids, and one goes missing is going to have a hard time persuading people they are responsible parents. But they seem to think (or at least say) they are, in the face of the facts.
As I keep saying, I do not know what happened to Madeleine. I do think, so far, on the basis of what we have seen, that the parents *could* have done it.
I remember when my children were small, I'd put them to bed and sometimes I'd go talk to some of the neighbors outside, maybe a few houses away.
I think someone could have come in and snatched the children while I was chatting. Yet I feel that overall I was a very responsible and loving mother.
Ask my kids
K.
Lord Stevens says (in that reputable journal better known as the News of the Screws) the McCanns would not be charged with murder in Britain on the basis of the flimsy evidence so far brought. Of course they have not been charged in Portugal either. So this one looks a bit like some Clarence Mitchell spin in the Screws.
Liz Hunt - is just a Telegraph columnist. Her opinion piece is her opinion. The only remarkable thing about it is that she feels confident enough to critise the style of a far better writer than herself.
It's a very old argument in this case, Karina. I too as a parent have left my children while I have gone to do something for a short time. I have even occasionally left them to go to the shop round the corner.
Now, I have never left my kids in an unlocked apartment at night in a foreign country while I went off to eat and drink with my friends - and despite what the McCanns have said, nobody does this, it is not normal behaviour. But if, unfortunately, one of my kids was abducted when I was not looking after them, I would be unable to claim that I was a responsible parent. The same would go for you and - in this case - for Gerry and Kate McCann.
One of the problems Gerry and Kate have - not the only one - is that they consistently claim that they are responsible parents, in the face of the evidence - a missing child - that they clearly are (were) not.
Curiosity question.
If leaving the children asleep and checking them every half hour themselves makes the McCanns irresponsible parents, what would they be had they paid for the once an hour or so "baby listening" service that the resort offered?
Since I don't believe the "death/murder/cover-up/conspiracy", I believe the result of the night would have been the same - a very much missing Madeleine. Would they still be blamed for it or called irresponsible, as they are now? Even if they had done what so many people have vilified them for not doing, and paid the resort to listen at the apartment windows for them?
Ok...just to clarify for people, some people are in the states or Canada, I am confused on babysitting services that were offered at night? I assume that meant you hired a nanny to actually sit in your room with your children until you return, in the US/Canada terms we call it "babysitting"? DC what do you mean "they be had they paid for the once an hour or so "baby listening" service that the resort offered?"
Dee -
This is from the Portugal Resident website.
Mark Warner resorts offer either a free room listening or a drop-in crèche service for young children.
The room listening service operates from 8pm until midnight when nannies tour the rooms checking on the children and reporting any problems to parents.
Oh, and this is something I find of great interest. I've seen a lot of people really tearing into the McCanns for going on a family vacation and then leaving the children in "day care" all day long.
I found these descriptions of a Mark Warner Kids' Club (this one in Paleros) on MumsNet.
The Nannies exceeded all expectations, great clubs, great activities, our 6 yr old loved his club and was one of those children who wanted to be there rather than with us (and this is a shy, quiet child we didnt think would go in the door of a club). He did a different activity each hour; sailing, windsurfing, waterskiing, tennis, football, rounders etc.
This poster also said that the club was open from 9-1, closed for lunch, and open again from 3-5.
The child-care was great, our 3yo went sailing, ice cream trips, swimming in a really neat childs pool - all with the Mini Club that he was in. Meals for kids were really great, they serve tea at around 5pm, with lots of kids favorites to eat. Then the baby listening started at 8pm. The staff walk around the rooms every 15 mins and listen at the door, if your child is making a noise they stay at the door and radio through to the control Nanny - who sends someone to find you.
I can't speak for anyone else, but that doesn't sound like any terrible, horrible, boring "day care" to me. It sounds like the kids would actually have a lot more fun at the club than they would with me.
Thank you DC, wow I really did not understand that is what the hotel provided for night-time services. I can understand more of what the parents felt, some what. Shake head...doesn't mean a whole-lot in the scheme of events.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/v...returns-to-
work
“Gerry has spoken to Leicester-shire Police about security at the hospital and about the possibility of a police presence in place when he goes back to his job.”
However Kate, 39, who worked part-time as a locum GP, has said in the past that she is unable to contemplate working again while her daughter remains missing.
Good god...is she really being hung out to dry?
Portuguese law prevents the couple from speaking out, but Dr Russell O’Brien, one of the “Tapas Nine” dining with them when Madeleine disappeared, is set to issue a detailed version of events on that night in a bid to end the suspicion stalking his friends – despite the risk of being charged with perverting the course of justice.
The McCanns’ lawyers will this week re-evaluate the legal restraints that have so far kept him and his friends silent. Dr O’Brien has been advised that prosecution would be unlikely, given the sensitivity of the case and the diplomatic problems that charges might stir up.
Hmmm that didn't seem to stop Dr Payne the other day????
DC - the 'room listening service' - well that almst encourages parents to think that that level of attention is ok. If the Tapas 9 were doing what they said then it ws more or less the same and there would have been no advantage in using this service. I can't beleive anyone would think that 'listening' was enough - but in context you might think - well if that's what everyone does ...
For older children this kind of service - a nanny checking the room frequently -, might be appropriate, but maybe not for three small children in one room...
Lynn, Karina, what bothers me is the fact that in this blog ( which I read regularly because of the many intelligent and helpful lines of thinking and the tone which is most of the time non-agressive and polite) the discussion too often centers on the question: could parents do such a monstrous thing and then sit down to have dinner and laugh and drink and so on.
There are so many people with personality disorders, in all social levels, in all age-groups, so the fact that WE wouldn't act like that wouldn t implicate that it couldn t be true. People or better parents who are -for some unknown reason - seperated from their ability to be sympathetic, from their emotions, their values, their conscience,even more so under pressure - they seem to exist. excuse my English I am from Germany
Andrea
Edited By Siteowner
Thank you Dee for the SuspiciousMinds satire, I actually laughed til near the end when I got sad again.
Re babysitting: I am certain that if the McCanns or any other guests at MW's Ocean Club had wanted someone to actually watch their children while in the same apt as the children, the resort would have someone on hand to accommodate them.
What if the children were given something to settle them down, or if the new report done by the McCanns' own hired forensics team is correct, what if only Madeleine had been given something to settle her down? AND she had been smacked across the face in a moment of heated temper by the mother? Then perhaps death had ensued from the young brain having taken a double whammy. The father is there, he realizes that this cannot be reported as an accident. If the child had only been sedated perhaps they could have reported it as such. Perhaps. Perhaps tho doctors they could have owned up to that. But if two atrocities had been inflicted on Madeleine, they could not, as this could ruin them completely. Now they would have everything to lose, their leaving the children alone would be used in trial to show them totally unfit. All they had left would be lost so they cover it all up.
They temporarily hide the body in the freezer of the refrigerator of the empty apt next to theirs. Or if that is too small, then a freezer in the service area. Or even perhaps in a suitcase.
Then they use the priest to their advantage to get the keys to the church and they hide the body in the cold basement of the church. Or in the freezer in the cold basement of the church. Later they confess everything to him, even that, and not only can he not tell anyone but perhaps he feels he would be implicated in the hiding of the body. This naturally wears on him and breaks him down over time so that he must go away for a while.
At last they get a car and as no one is watching them that day at church they secrete the body into the car - perhaps via a suitcase again, or via a garment bag. Something oozes out of it and hairs pull out when the garment bag is removed for its final journey to the sea.
Andrea - actually I think that Gerry could be the sort of person who could in a crisis act as if all was normal, and indeed convince others to do so. It is possible for people to supress their emotions in this way and then suffer delayed reaction later. The justification is - to protect Kate and his family. I find this understandable - if not something I could do myself. However there are people who can do this and often it is a virtue - in war for instance.
Dee
I loved the suspicious minds satire .
John
I agree that Gerry could act well in a crisis also, especially as he is a surgeon and has to have high level functioning in the most stressful situations.
Has anyone heard anymore about the priest who said "I was deceived"
Alipio Ribeiro, the Nacional Director of the PJ, has given today an interview to the spanish newspaper El Pais:
http://www.elpais.com/articulo/s...elpepisoc_2/
Tes
He said that the rogatory commission is ready to be sent in the next days to England to interrogate the McCann's friends.
I translated the article Jose linked to English with Google:
The person responsible for the investigation of the 'case Madeleine' seeks to clarify the facts under an unprecedented media pressure. Sooner or later the truth be known, he says. And those responsible will be tried in Portugal.
Question. What feels to run a media event so?
Answer. Well, it's true that the case has gone beyond what Madeleine police; For many different reasons, has generated considerable international interest and has evolved far beyond its appearance police. It has an enormous media side, that no police in the world could have controlled. But that has nothing to do with us, if it had happened a few kilometers farther, in Spain or in France, it would have been the same. The case has many elements that have fueled the interest of the media, there are many players, has been very public from the beginning and triggered the imagination ... People create their history and the mind, it seems as if we were all suddenly criminal investigators .
P. Everyone speaks unless you and the British police. At least officially. Because leaks and leaks there have been many.
R. There has been, without doubt, but less than it would appear. The imagination of journalists has also worked hard. What is certain is that the police must have serenity to separate history, fantasy, as police. We can not get carried away with emotion, we must keep open all scenarios and walk step by step.
P. Does this mean that there is still a lot to reach the final?
R. I am convinced that sooner or later we will have a result. I can not say when. It would not be balanced on my part. But I am optimistic. The police are optimistic by nature, because it must uncover mysteries, but it has to work without preconceived ideas and have an open mind to all possibilities.
P. But his first boss, Gon
çalo Amaral is confident that Madeleine died on May 3.
R. Certainty not know, I think it is better not to have certainties so that there are no surprises. There are, in fact, a hypothesis that has gained some veracity and has more force, but we do not rule out anything. If there is a hint that said they saw the girl somewhere, we see it and discarded. While it is true that in the first phase, the investigation went to the thesis of kidnapping almost exclusively.
P. Some have criticized this option: there is little precedent for child abductions in Portugal, and the literature does not include kidnappings police buildings closed because predators operating in open spaces ...
R. It is true that in Portugal there is little tradition of such abductions, but we could not close that possibility. Parents were foreigners, and analyzed all regardless of means.
P. Are Missed discernment to investigate parents from the outset, because there was so confusing testimony and they were the last they saw the girl?
R. That's easy to say now.
P. Will suggests that there was pressure to give priority to the rapture?
R. We have never been pressured in any direction. Collaboration with the British police was always loyal and respectful.
P. But it was the family who suggested the path of abduction by pedophilia ...
R. Yes, but the British police had never interfered, I could not do it. Obviously, if we need information, the British police supported us. How would the French, Spanish or other European police. But we led the investigation.
P. Being a British environment, and a suspected British victim also British, it seems logical to assume that the assistance would be more important.
R. He was a British environment and we were far from having a precise idea of what happened that night. True, the context has made it very difficult things.
P. Did you sense that struggled in recent months against a machine too powerful for the media of the Judicial Police?
R. Do not say much. First, we have never had insufficient means in this case, although it is true that excessive international concern has multiplied alleged sightings of the girl and red herrings to a level that would have been too high for any police of the world. Secondly, we still do not know the truth, so I could not make moral judgments on that campaign. I have no results yet, I do not know what happened that night.
P. Were the British policemen who suggested bringing the dogs that would eventually turn 180 degrees to research?
R. They propose it, yes, because some animals are very rare that we do not have, and high reliability. Although they do not offer conclusive evidence, the dogs allow us to explore another line of inquiry.
P. Do you think that this case will be so strange a simple solution? Or think it may have new shock effect?
R. I have my ideas about that, but I can not comment. The only idea I can pass on is that, whatever the meaning of what happened that night, it was a tragic situation for the people who lived.
P. He said that it is a difficult case. Did you autocrĂtica the Judicial Police?
R. There are many cases in the world for missing children, and sometimes it is not known of them in years. But none of this external component, that radiance that gives it a social dimension fantastic, almost unreal. Any police would be disturbed in a scene so, for that excessive public display. Be very mild nerve to be systematic in such conditions. Now we are going to give a new impetus to research and look at the same time without fear what we have done, not to judge or criticize, but to try and understand signals that may not well understood at the time.
P. Do ImaginĂł ever to become famous for a case?
R. I do not I will be famous for this case. But I know the drama of the people who have lived close (referring to Gon
çalo Amaral, the commissioner stopped). And of course I know, anywhere I go, even in distant places, everyone talks about the case, is always on the table.
P. Will plays its prestige Judicial Police?
R. No, neither Portugal nor the Judicial Police is nothing in this play. People are not going to stop coming to the Algarve holiday for this. Neither the country's image is going to change. But all policemen of the world would like to resolve such a case and solve it well.
P. Some people believe that the case is open.
R. I hope I can close it. We can not yet, but if we do away with little time has passed. Many similar cases have lasted more and eventually were resolved. I think this is also our case. We will have an idea of what happened. We do not guarantee, but I think it will happen.
P. The dispatch of a new team of inspectors from Lisbon, what sense?
R. At the outset we made a big investment in the human case to discard all the tracks that arose. Then we put a team of half a dozen inspectors, the standard size in similar cases. Now we have added a new structure of reflection to analyze the fundamentals again. Many investigations are changing on the fly because they often help to advance. In the United States, the FBI does so often. Help us to rethink, to see what was valued Well, what obstinacy ...
P. How many men are now working in the field?
R. More than a dozen.
P. Many seem.
R. This is not a case either. From the outset it was obvious that it would not be an easy case.
P. Did He said the immediate presence of journalists in Praia da Luz? Why Oficce Foreign involvement in the campaign to parents?
R. Never have felt political pressure. And the British police has never been an obstacle. From the outset, some colleagues were magnificent.
P. But the spokesmen of McCann have strongly criticized the work of the Judicial Police ...
R. Yes, but spoke with the family and the press, not the police. And it must be understood that the British press works that way. They said unjust things, but we could not react to this day, get to play ping pong, the Judicial Police against the British press. That game does not interest us. Sooner or later, mean that we are giving the best to resolve the case. It worries me that. But we have a tradition different from yours, to communicate less, and further judicial secrecy limits us this year.
P. So far, the leaks have encouraged speculation that McCann has described as very painful. Do you not think that the Judicial Police should officially inform rather than dropping assumptions data in the press?
R. With the new Code of Procedure, all the files will be public, and secrecy will be the exception. It is a paradigm shift, and we will have to improve the way we communicate and assemble a cabinet press bette
R. With the new Code of Procedure, all the files will be public, and secrecy will be the exception. It is a paradigm shift, and we will have to improve the way we communicate and assemble a cabinet press better. But even the best Cabinet in the world could have this mixture disprove leakage and imagination. It is impossible to cope with that. Only a cabinet crisis management to the American could manage. But that was not created overnight.
P. Will you take the case of communication?
R. I want to be close, but I can not shoulder. In cases so there is never much to say, lest jeopardize the investigation. If you count does hinder every thing that henceforth the fire burn even more.
P. What will they do when they reach the results of laboratory Birmingham? While in the UK and all of them speak ...
R. When they arrive ponderaremos what we can say and what not. He has left a lot of conflicting information, rumors, noise, but it is irrelevant. Examinations are very complex, difficult to achieve. I know that when the British police are informed of their results, we also know. And I also know that the laboratory in Birmingham is one of the best in the world.
P. Amaral, the coordinator to criticize you stopped by the police in a British newspaper, believes that the key to the case is DNA analysis. Do you have so much faith?
R. They can help a lot, in a final sense, to clarify what happened. But there are no elements which alone resolve an investigation. Tests are complementary to other elements. We need to see them calmly and with distance. The police have to be hard, but not passionate.
P. Amaral updated last week Paulo Rebelo, the new boss sent from Lisbon. Does that mean it will continue to help?
R. Sure.
P. The McCann already have a team of lawyers very sophisticated. Do you think that the Judicial Police may mount a strong accusation?
R. We have already done a great job analyzing and discarding hundreds of evidence and clues, but in all investigations, there is a key moment, a click that clarifies everything and help to get to the end. We have not yet reached that click.
P. If finally had trial, were held in Portugal?
R. First we need to define either the facts, then those responsible. It should be held here, of course, even without the defendants. But this a very remote, which, so far, we have not tried. And this does not mean they believe that the British citizens are to be judged.
P. It said for weeks that they are preparing the letters rogatory to interrogate back to the friends who dinner on May 3 in the Tapas bar. Are ya ready?
R. Yes, they are prepared, and in a few days traveling with a team of police and the prosecutor of PortimĂŁo.
P. In recent months, you have, for if that were not enough, the novelty of the possible presence of ETA in Portugal. How the Judicial Police has responded to this new challenge?
R. I have already given instructions so that they begin to implement the agreement signed
R. I have already given instructions so that they begin to implement the agreement signed by the ministers of Justice and Interior to form joint teams of judges and policemen. We have a wonderful relationship with our Spanish colleagues, and we hope that we send all information necessary for further investigation in a cooperative manner.
P. Do you think that ETA has infrastructure here?
R. For now, there is no guarantee that the have. We know that have gone through here, like so many other Spaniards, but we do not think they have a logistics base at the level they have in France, for example. For cultural reasons, especially because Portugal is not a means to deliver them, are not accustomed. But we are very attentive to any move, and we continue to work closely with Spain, as seen in the arrest of El Solitario, which was exemplary. Europe is getting smaller, and the only possible future for the police is to work increasingly.
Where is Madeleine?
It seems to me that anybody spoke about the theory that Madeleine could have been transported to England.
Pat Brown presents that theory in her blog:
http://patbrownprofiling.blogspo...ay-
another.html
Nice link Jose but i think highly unlikely but as she states theories help uncover ideas and that is what this blog is all about.
I do think that it gives thought re: mummification - this could be why Madeleines body didnt smell and was lighter to carry around in a suitcase
Pat Brown's site is certainly very interesting although the suitcase theory does at first, and even second glance, seem ridiculous you can at least see how it could be done.
I found a link on this blog to
www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk which has an archive of all the posts except those that gerry has deleted. It makes very odd reading I remember thinking that as I read them but they are even wierder all together.
I don't know what to make of G going back to work. If he feels wierd about it how on earth are his patients going to feel when they turn up for their appointment and find he's their Consultant?
I agree with the comment on Pat Brown's site that said there's no way, unless Portugal's airport security is conveniently non-existent, that you could get a mummy aboard an airplane in checked luggage. The person manning the X-ray machine would have seen it immediately, unless they were conveniently looking away at the exact moment.
Thanks for posting the link about Gerry's blog. I never had a chance to read his entries right after May 3rd.
It's very odd...this detailed journal of his days. Very few references to Madeleine and lots of minute details which seem very irrelevant to me. Of course, everyone reacts differently in such tragic circumstances and I can see someone writing a personal journal but this was to be publicized on line !
I don't quite understand it.
I'm baaack - my puter crashed on wed. by fri. I crashed so my son got our puter techie over here to fix it sat. - yeah !!!
Emma I am with you - I too am in the cosmos a lot - and retired from the med, field in 1994 -
if M was dead before dinner then it was not from an OD so it would have been K while G was playing tennis...no ? I still believe she was put in a bin liner and into a suitcase on wheels - then refrigerated til the the trip in the trunk where the fluid leaked as she was warming up - but there were pics and discussions re: K&G changing strollers - so maybe a stroller was used at some time -
Dee I loved the satire - I said some of those same things myself,actually outloud and my cat agreed with me -
Karina I don't think anyone is trying to convince you the McC's did this themselves - we are not trying to get anyone to change their opinions - you ask a question, someone answers their opinion, doesn't mean they think you should change yours -
Stanley - we think alike when it comes to celebrities -
don't know about G going back to work with extra security and a police presence - kinda ironic as they brought this on all by themselves trying to cover up to protect their careers -
Someone referred to G's supposed "angst" at going back to work and requiring extra security and a police presence...doesn't that tell you alot about what kind of man he is? It's all about him, isn't it?! One only has to read his blog to discover rather quickly that he is utterly narcissistic to the extreme.
Pdx
"Karina I don't think anyone is trying to convince you the McC's did this themselves - we are not trying to get anyone to change their opinions - you ask a question, someone answers their opinion, doesn't mean they think you should change yours -"
Not sure I understand what prompted this response !!
24Horas Today:
New team directed by Paulo Rebelo try to discover
Murat could have hid the body of Maddie.
Robert Murat, friend of the McCanns, is the main suspect in the hiding the body of Madeleine, in the last May 3. It is the conviction of the Portuguese investigators closed to the case. Nevertheless, no evidence has been found validating that theory, has reported the 24Horas from sources within the investigation.
This is why the new team directed by Paulo Rebelo, high responsible of the Polícia Judiciária, is verifying all the details of events that occurred before and after the alert given to the Authorities for the disappearance of Maddie.
Besides, until yesterday, there was no concrete evidence of the final destination of the little girl. Dead or alive. As a consequence, the house of Murat should be visited again by the authorities probably this week.
“There is a period of time between 18 and 22 hours that is full of contradictions that must be clarified. Consequently the McCanns and the friends that were dinning with them should be newly eared. It’s obvious that this task should be performed by the British authorities, after dispatching their residencies for the acts to Leicestercity. In the Great Britain we don’t have authority, (we intervene) only if our collaboration is required officially, that didn’t had happened until now”, explained a judicial source to the 24Horas.
The main theory of the investigators of the PJ, closed to the investigation since the beginning, is that all the children of the Couples -present at dinner at the Tapas- were in the house of the McCanns such has reported the 24Horas in its edition of the 9th October. That may explain the fact that they checked alternately if the children were alright. The PJ only has the confirmation - obtained to the inhabitants of the houses next to the resort- that only the apartment of the McCanns has been effectively visited by the participants of the dinner.
The Judiciária believes that, during the dinner, the little Maddie has gone out to find her parents. And, half-sleeping, fell in the stairs of ten steps existing in the exit of the apartment. She died accidentally and finally was found by Gerry McCann. Then he called for the help of Murat. The fact of being under the effects of sedation according to the Instituto Nacional de Medicinal Legal [National Insitute of Forensic Medicine] and the twins were also sleeping due to sedative brings the Couple, for professional reasons, to eliminate the body. For this effect, they made contact with Robert Murat, who advised them to return to the restaurant. In that period of time, the friend has carried out the body and transported it to his house, being at 219 yards (200 meters) from the apartment where the McCanns lived. What happened next is a mystery. The only trail that exists is the alleged fluids pertaining to Maddie discovered in the Renault Scénic rented b
The only trail that exists is the alleged fluids pertaining to Maddie discovered in the Renault Scénic rented by them 25 days after the disappearance of the toddler.
Who has disposed of Maddie's body?
“The body should have been kept in the house of Murat, and later, the Couple or somebody who has access to the vehicle disposed of it. But we are talking about conjectures. Nothing is proven. That’s the subject of revision of the evidences that is done now and is extremely important. New people can bring new views on the case. We are in a phase of internal analysis about everything we have done, but conscious that everything has been done at that time”, reports an officer of the Homicide Section of the PJ that has spoken anonymously due to orders emanating from the Public Ministry for an “absolute silence about the Maddie case”.
Only one great doubt remains for the Authorities: who has disposed of the body and how?
I still think Murat is involved - gut instinct i dont know what it is but i do think somewhere down the line he is involved. I also think that the theories do seem extreme and so ridiculous - mummification - hiding bodies in suitcases - police protection going back to work - but this case sadly has become that much of a mockery. The McCanns remind me of the Beckhams re: the spin and negative karma they seem to put out - the sort of desperation to be in the limelight so that noone forgets them. Which i can see as they want to keep Madeleine in the minds of others but it is the way they go about it that is so wrong and make us presume they are guilty. The presumptions we make are based on what we hear or what they say or do - in that respect you cannot blame anyone for thinking they are guilty their repsonses and actions make us all ponder their innocence.
I do think the body wasnt transported home i think that is getting way over the top.
Yesterday at the Portuguese television RTP, one of the Portuguese lawyers of the McCanns said that he was expecting with serenity the results of the investigations of the PJ; Rogério Alves said he was waiting for the revelation of the results of the Polícia Judiciária in cooperation with the British Police and said there is a lot of information circulating about the Maddie case without knowing their origin.
Rogério Alves: “And we keep calm with serenity the devolpment of the investigations and at the end when we would get a result, when the Public Ministry would opt for an accusation or a non accusation, etc, then we will talk. Although there s a lot of people that continues to talk without even knowing the results, without knowing nothing about what is happening in the investigation and have already taken their own conclusions, which however are reinforced every days with information of the so-called ‘sources’ without knowing exactly which they are: neither the sources nor the information.”
Gosh that Murat is very helpful. He'll do anything to help out tourists on holiday!! Including ruin his own life, risk being suspected as a pedophilic murderer, risk never seeing his own daughter again...
The thing I found strange is when Gerry Mccann was asked if he knew Robert Murat and he said " I have no comment on that."
That answer of Gerry is rather strange, he should have answered: "no I dont know him". Instead he suggested that he knew him but he didnt want to speak about that to the journalist.
I heard a rumour that Gerry knew Robert in the past - not sure how true that is.
I think RM is involved but again I think he is the one who took Madeleine I do not think he helped the parents move her - why would he risk that I mean who would???? he would be an idiot to risk that I agree with the quote pdx
Re Lynn
what do you mean exactly about RM when you said he moved her. Do you think that he killed Maddie or that he found the corpse and after move it or that he snatched her alive?
Indeed - the speculative account (quoted by Jose 3.36 from 24 Horas) would make sense of the evening's events (assuming the evidence shows Maddie was dead at the for long enough to leave death scent). It leaves the question: what was the motive for Murat to help dispose of the body?
Re Reasonable Man
Apparently he has no reason to participate to the disposal of the body. But, his behavior made him to be considered as a suspect: helping the police in the investigation, etc.
It could have done it if he was a really good friend of Gerry or Kate, may be, or if he had participated directly in the homicide crime and in that case it's not an accidental murder due to sedation.
When, at what time, did the McCanns talked to RM? During the dinner? I dont think so. Too short time to convince someone to hide a body. If he was contacted it certainly should have been before the dinner. It could had happen when Kate was alone after the depart of the Paynes, or when Gerry came back from the tennis. Was RM in the scene of crime before or after the homicide?
To clarify: if the police do think that Madeleine was dead (in the apartment or at the foor of the steps) they must have some evidence of this - we can infer that the death scent is the evidence.
So - if the apparent police view that she was dead at the apartment is correct, she must have been dead there for a period of time. Something like one and a half hours or more after the time of death.
Working back - if the body was not there at 10pm (having been moved) the latest she can have died is about 8.30.
It is very hard to see how the parent/s were not implicated if the evidence shows she was dead in or around the apartment.
The supposition that Gerry found her dead some time after she died; or dying and then kept her in the aprtment for some time after she died; fits the timeline. (We can note that it is just possible on this basis that Kate wouldn't actually know what had happened - though the times and other factors seem to be against that possibility).
In this scenario, Murat may or may not have been involved. It seems unlikely that Murat killed her - deliberately or by accident - since he would have had to have done so at 8.30 or before, and then come back to the apartment more than an hour later to dispose of the body which had by then left the death scent.
Is it possible that Madeleine was taken or wandered off, then killed or died, and was taken back to the apartment dead? Hmmm.
Anyway, on this scenario, Murat had the opportunity and the means to help dispose of the body. But there is no obvious motive - unless there is something we don't know (highly possible!).
I meant I dont think Murat would help at all if G and K were somehow responsible for their daughters death - I think his behaviour being "too" helpful and involved points to something to hide - guilt I mean!!!
I have heard several reports about the shutters - if they were down someone opened them if they were up would Madeleine wander outside looking for mummy and daddy. Of course she would, thats what kids do. I think she wandered which would explain why she was taken for an abuser is going to take all 3 or at least take 2 as girls are in high demand - he wouldnt leave the toddlers who are easy to mould
Connection to the McCanns? I remember reading about a week ago how Murat became involved in the first place. The night she went missing two of the Tapas were very near his home calling for "Maddie", he came out of his house and talked to them. They either asked or he volunteered (can't remember) and that's how his involvement started.
Here is an interesting article http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top...89520-19528076/
from the past:
"MADELEINE McCann suspect Robert Murat was branded a liar and accused of "peeking" into her holiday apartment by furious family friends.
Fiona Payne, Russell O'Brien and Rachael Oldfield insisted they saw him outside Kate and Gerry McCann's flat on the night Madeleine, four, was snatched - despite his denials.
And according to newspaper reports, Dr Payne told police that Murat "seemed to be peeking into the apartment".
http://news.independent.co.uk/
eu...icle2556469.ece
This is also interesting:
"Robert Murat, was impatient to rent a car two days before he was first questioned by police, because he claimed his own was needed by those involved in the search for the four-year-old." "He said: 'I need a car for myself because the English people who are looking for the little girl need to borrow my car," Mrs Rocco recalled. "You could tell from his voice that he needed it in a hurry. I was puzzled. Why would he need to lend his car to somebody else [in the search]?"
Lynn, I always had the impression that the 'wandering off' theory was the most likely one. The parents probably left the door open thinking there was little risk the children would get up as they had been given a sedative (even if only a mild one like Calpol). She perhaps fell down the stairs (as the PJ now also seem to assume), hit her head and died. Gerry may have found her and hid her temporarily in the room until he and K figured out what to do next. But this theory does not link in nicely with the fact that he spent 15 minutes of relaxed chit chat with another British guest whom he met after having checked the kids at 9:05 pm.
That witness stated that G. acted in a relaxed manner and did not seem to be in any hurry.
Interesting that Murat hired a car - was this checked for Madeleines DNA?
My belief is still that Madeleine wandered off and Murat snatched her.
Lynn, I read they searched his vehicle & his Mom's not sure about this hire car or if he ended up getting it.
The problem I have in believing she wandered away is it was dark on the street. The analysis theorize she would go down hill to the rest. & creche where it was better lit and familiar to her.
http://downloads.sol.pt/pdf/made...eleine/
ed44.pdf
The Sol reported it was suspected to have relationship between Robert Murat and Russel O’Brian. Murat has been ten days before the disappearance of Maddie in Exter in England where lived a sister but also the couple of pratishioner Russel and Jane.
After Murat having been officially suspected, Fiona Payne and Rachel Mumpilly said to have seen Robert Murat in the Ocean Club around 23h45; and Russel said to have seen him around 01h.
Russel said “he told me that he had a daughter with the same sage of Maddie”; Fiona Payne reported to the Police that he was peeking in the apartment that night.
Sharon: I think our best information on the conversation with Jeremy Wilkins tells us it took place between 9.05 and 9.15. If Wilkins says Gerry was relaxed, that is interesting; but it probably makes little difference to the question of whether he had anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance.
If he didn't, and at that point had no idea his daughter was in any difficulty, then there is no reason why he would not have been relaxed at that time.
However, if he did have something to do with it, he would have had to pretend not to from the point when whatever happened happened... right up until now - including during the meal, during the search, during the campaign, the meeting with the pope, etc etc etc. If we can accept that (I appreciate that some people cannot), all of which flows from the hypothesis that he did have some involvement, then the meeting with Wilkins may have appeared to him to afford a useful alibi - and in that case the appearance of being relaxed would also make perfect sense.
Perhaps the most important facts about the meeting with Wilkins are the time and location it took place. Would his being there at that time increase or decrease the chances of Gerry knowing what had happened to Madeleine? It means, obviously, that whatever else he was doing before and after the conversation, at that time he was not personally disposing of a body.
However, if Madeleine died at the foot of the steps some time before 8.30 and was subsequently in the apartment dead for sufficient time to leave traces of her being dead - as is implied by the putative police evidence - it is hard to see in what circumstances Gerry could not have known she was dead at the time of his meeting with Wilkins.
In the same article, a GNR officer said that the shutter was difficult to open and was very noisy. I was more easy to enter by the door but no break-in. This area is very quite with pratically no cars.
Lynn: the wandering off theory is still possible (and incidentally, it need not involve Murat) - but only if it turns out that Madeleine was not dead in the apartment.
None of us here on this thread has any more access to the facts than any other, and it is clear that there is no body, so I am speculating as much as you.
However, the police appear to have evidence to the effect that she was in fact dead in or near the apartment, which also seems to imply that she was dead there for something like a couple of hours. "Wandering off" would have to be ruled out if that evidence were conclusive, simply on the basis that a corpse can't wander off.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages...770&
ito=newsnow
Mrs McCann used to work two days a week but a close friend of the family said: "Kate doesn't want to go back to being a locum GP. She wants a new career in child welfare."
The McCanns, it was reported today, have hired a Portuguese public relations firm to handle the campaign to find Madeleine and to improve their image in the country.
And yesterday's reports it was their idea for the PJ to re-interview everyone and they gave them a list of 25 names.
These people are so out-of-touch with reality. It really insults my intelligence along with others I am sure.
Just a few questions really -
1) Who is going to have convidence in Kate as a child welfare expert? Bad idea.
2) Murat seems to have gone from 'innocent victim' to prime suspect (again) and I'm not sure why. What is the fresh evidence that has reversed his fortunes? How can anyone explain his motivation if he is supposed to have helped the McCanns?
3) Some of the Tapas9 are due to be questioned this week by Brit police. Do we expect more arguidos after this?
4) We seem to be back to mummification. It took 70 days in ancient Egypt. What about straight burial - what state would a body be in after 20+ days? Anyone know.
Lynn: I agree with Reasonable Man, I assume as a fact that the dogs found the scent of a dead body in that appartment. Consequently, the body of Maddie should have been in the apartement for a time estimated to be between 1 1/2 hour or 2 hours minimum. The theory that Madeleine has wandered off and has been kidnapped is not consitent. There are only two possibilities in my opinion:
1- she has been killed by a predator in that apartement or near the apartement after the departure of the parents, and removed from the apartement just before the alert at 22h.
2- she died accidently or she has been killed by someone who knew her (family or friends of the family) between 18h-22h.
OOH i just remember one of my thinkings - it was that Murats sister works for an adoption agency and i am sure i have seen a few films where children are trafficked through these agencies - its worth a thought!!
Re John what state would a body be in after 20+ days?
After 20+ days, a body buried is in the state of advanced putrefaction. Consequently, the body could not be transported in a car due to the stench.
Lynn | 10.22.07 - 11:09 am - yea but, would he really steal a girl right from his front door step (figuratively) for his sister's agency. It wouldn't take much to work out he would be a prime suspect.
Re R.M. suddenly turning back into a suspect, I have a hunch if this was leaked from the PJ to either make the Tapas let their guard down for the future interviews or to see if they heap more junk stories on R.M. If it came from C.M. & camp well...spin.
I would be surprised if we didn't wind up with a new suspect or 3.
http://askadivemaster.com/The%
20...composition.pdf
The Chronology of Decomposition. The following sequence of events represents inconsiderable detail the process of decomposition. This timetable would normally be followed in water with a temperature range of 65F to 75F.
Twelve to Twenty-Four Hours- The skin is the first to change color, from normal to light blue to an almost green discoloration. This color change usually occurs in the, lower quadrant first, being most noticeable in the area of the lower abdomen / pelvis /groin.
Twenty-Four to Thirty-Six Hours. The discoloration becomes quite pronounced, and the skin takes on a marbled pattern. The blood is now reacting with hydrogen sulfide, which has been produced within the blood vessels. This produces a characteristic dark green (almost black) discoloration. As putrefaction advances, the blood seeps from the blood vessels, giving the body a general purplish-black color.
Thirty-Six to Forty-Eight Hours: The face and trunk begin to swell noticeably, taking on the characteristic "bloated" appearance. The eyelids, lips, scrotum, and other sites where skin is loosely attached may become dramatically swollen and bloated. On palpation (feeling or manipulation) of these areas, crepitus (a feeling described as "rice crispies") is noticed.
Sixty to Seventy-Two Hours: Putrefaction has now spread to all areas of the body, including the fingers and toes. The entire body has now changed color, and facial features may become unrecognizable.
Four to Seven Days- Hair and nails become loose, and are easily removed unless the body is handled very carefully. The skin covering is easily damaged or torn loose. The body should still retain its structural integrity if carefully lifted by both arms and legs.Pockets of foul smelling gas usually form under the skin. These gas pockets may easily escape, allowing this putrid smelling gas to exit the body through any tears in the skin. As well as gases formed through putrefaction, malodorous, colored liquids may escape from the body from natural orifices, wounds, or skin ruptures caused by rough handling, injury or putrefaction. When putrefaction is advanced the skin of the hands (palmar) and feet (plantar) may become easily detached and make subsequent finger printing impossible. (This gas is what K-9’s can hit upon)
Two Weeks and Beyond: In time, all soft tissues of the body (if not dried by heat) will be reduced to a gray, greasy, unrecognizable mass. Eventually, only skeletal remains are left behind to indicate the prior presence of a human body. In time, the skeleton will also be consumed.
The above chronology is given for reference. Individual situations CAN and DO
@ DEE I think that the front door was locked so she had to go out the back and down the steps - that gate looks iron and heavy so perhaps she couldnt open it so she wandered out into the dark lane.
OK so lets say she was "dead" in the apartment perhaps she wandered off fell down the stairs and was found by someone in the Tapas9 who took her back to the apartment and tried and failed to revive her - that may explain their silence but what next? Seems a bit extreme to say she wandered off then was returned on her death.
Yet this still seems iffy - say someone broke in and tried to take her she woke struggled he picked her up she struggled he dropped her on the hard floor and she hit her head/fitted and died - he left in a panic. would explain why the twins were left.
So many scenarios we really need the dna results to get things sorted - why are they taking so long????
Because they will give something vital away and the police need more time - they will have the results now and will be working on capturing/compiling their evidence I am sure.
I have to state I think abduction seems less and less likely as why leave the twins????
I think re:abduction - it has to rule out a desperate parent as they would take younger children.
That leaves a pedophile - again they would take twins too - unless of course they were disturbed perhaps Kate coming home or Gerry (he stated he thought intruder was in apartment - take that with a pinch of salt) but perhaps the intention was to come back for the twins but panic set in and they left with just Madeleine.
Again there are so many ideas to throw around my head spins at times - i just cant help thinking no smoke without fire where Murat is concerned and Malinka - that was odd the way he cleared his hard drive - perhaps he had something to hide - child porn???
The russian mafia are infamously connected to the smuggling/abduction/abuse of children according to many sites on the net - he is a russian so perhaps there is something there after all.
@ John - this case goes from one extreme to the other so I wouldnt put anything past it - I still hold out its Mrs Murat who will turn out to be the "Mrs Hannigan" of the Annie movie.
RE: Dee and the state of decomposition - I read that if a body is buried in that heat it would quickly mummify and would not really smell much - this could be the reason that they could transport the body BUT would a mummified body leak DNA fluid???
Its quite possible of course that Murat is arguido for something other than Madeleine.
Jose - thanks for the graphic description of putrefaction - I think that there is no way she was moved after 25 days - I think that what was in the boot of the car (if true) was blankets, towels, coats or something used to wrap the body at some stage - i.e. incriminating evidence. If she was buried in a hurry it may be that this stuff was only retrieved later. The other more gory scenarios involve doctors using their surgical skills to dispose of the body and hence more body fluids and so on. Yucky in the extreme.
What is the possibility that the hire car was actually hired by someone who was Madeleines abductor - I mean was this car hired out between Madeleine going missing and the McCanns using the car. How many car rental places in PDL ??
Re Lynn: What is the possibility that the hire car was actually hired by someone who was Madeleines abductor - I mean was this car hired out between Madeleine going missing and the McCanns using the car.
The persons who hired the car before the McCanns were interviwed by the Police. I read it in a Portuguese newspaper, I trying to find the article. So the possibility is nil.
The newspaper, Correio da Manha, claimed a Lisbon-based PR agency is being paid Ł35,000 a month to help the McCanns. Lawyers acting for the couple are conscious that their popularity in Portugal needs to improve, with huge public pressure on police and prosecutors to bring charges against them.
It is feared that if the couple are tried in Portugal, a jury might find them guilty even if the case against them is weak.
Well I think the majority of the portuguese thinks they are involved and if they hired that agency people will turn against them evem more. "If you are ina hole, stop digging".
I remember to read something about GM knowing Murat, through a sister or having lived in the same town. I will try to find it.
IMO it is plausible that she was killed in a domestic acident (overdose, slapping, fall...) and that Murat helped to hide the bodyif he was an acquaintance. Could he be the misterious Tapas10? Probably not, as the waiters would remember him.
In fact the Correio da Manhă reports that company "Cunha Vaz Associados" has been contacted by the McCanns which has been in charge of the image of the president of the PSD (Socio-Democratic Party) Luís Filipe Menezes, leader of the Portuguese opposition.
The lawyers of the McCanns found it too much expensive: 50 000 euros more than they are payed! Consequently, they may contact other companies in the market such as the company of António Sousa Duarte. But this company woirks already with their lawyer Rogério Alves so they couldnt work for the McCanns.
I remember reading also that Murat knew Gerry - coincidence????? hmmm I think not. The world isnt that small after all.
RE: The car - so if DNA of Madeleine was definately in the car then the parents have to be involved no question.
I guess what we need to think about now is where did they hide the body/who helped/decomposition.
Still need answers about mummification - for if that was the case that would mean there would be no smell of a decomposing body BUT can a mummified body leak bodily fluids IF NOT then that solves the issue of was she buried pre transportation in hire car.
If no mummification then it would mean that the body had to be kept in a freezer but who's?
Anyone know what the address was of the villa the McCanns were moved to?
"The investigators believe that GM and RM met when the cardiologist was campaining for the Labour Party in Leicesterf."
http://www.24horasnewspaper.com/
...aderno=Portugal
and look how the world is really small
"Gordon Brown has appointed Lord Stevens, the head of a Conservative party policing taskforce, to be his adviser on international security issues."
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/
h...2115161,00.html
Brown talking about a policial case with the portuguese PM, ord Stevens insulting PJ saying there ia a wich hunt.
Really all this makes me very sick.
Re It is feared that if the couple are tried in Portugal, a jury might find them guilty even if the case against them is weak.
It's a curious conception of justice, thinking that a person could be judge innocent or guilty according to the popularity results of the pools.
I wonder who will pay for the Tapas' lawyers? I am sure each will have one. I am sure they are terrified; innocent or guilty. It wouldn't surprise me to see someone make a plea deal and come clean. They must be sick to death of all this?
Can arguidos have a PR company working for them? What are the rules governing what arguidos or their representatives can say? Do the McCanns have different rights regarding making public statements in Britain than they do in Portugal?
That's an interesting point about lawyers costs for the 'friends'. I'm sure some people think that it would be fine for whatever fund is paying for G & Ks costs to pay for theirs too. But I'd have to take issue with this, after all G & K are suspects and the friends may have to give evidence against them... surely this is not usual or ethically correct.
Liz
Sometimes we never know he true power of the police and governments - it can be scary to really delve to deep - conspiracy theories and all that.
@ JOHN RE: Mummification in the Pat Brown link she states in the heat of Portugal "Would it really be possible for one of the McCanns to cart the body of their daughter back to England? Yes, absolutely. Because of the climate in Portugal, it is possible that should they have buried Maddy in a shallow grave in a sandy substrate, her body would have mummified. Mummification is a desiccation of the corpse where the fluids drain into the ground and the rest of the body dries up. There is relatively little odor associated with a mummified body.
If this occurred, the body would be easier to transport; it would be lighter and drier and lacking the horrible smell of a corpse. Such a body could easily be placed in a sealed bag and placed in a suitcase."
Just a thought if gerry knew Madeleine was dead when he stopped to chat to Wilkins perhaps he was "stalling" Wilkins in case he interrupted the "removal" of Madeleines body.
http://tinyurl.com/2b9cpy
Update on Gerry's blog.
He is pleased that his friends are going to be re-interviewed.
K.
Mummification theory is ok I suppose but the person doing would have to know that it would work. I'm not sure even a doctor would be sure about timescales and so on. The idea that they brought the body back to England in a suitcase - now that is ludicrous - they were suspects by then and everything would ahve been scrutinised - even if it wasn't the McCanns would expect it to be and would never take that kind of risk.
Did GM ever used the private jet to go to UK? If so he could have transported the body.
Why would they bring the body to England? If a body was to be disposed of, the Atlantic ocean would be the best and almost the closest option.
@ JOHN i didnt mean they transported her home in the suitcase that in a million years wouldnt have happened i simply meant they could have put the body in a suitcase as it isnt suspicious to see people walking around with suitcases abroad.
Definately think taking the body on a plane is a no go Marilla - that would be impossible and no one in their right mind would risk getting caught.
Dee wrote: The newspaper, Correio da Manha, claimed a Lisbon-based PR agency is being paid Ł35,000 a month to help the McCanns. Lawyers acting for the couple are conscious that their popularity in Portugal needs to improve, with huge public pressure on police and prosecutors to bring charges against them.
Good God, they're worrying about their image? Unbelievable! That money better not be from the "Free Maddie" fund!
I can see the logic of wanting their child "home" that often happens but the means of getting her "home" are impossible.
@Karina | 10.22.07 - 3:39 pm : to me there's something spooky about the suspects in a case providing a running commentary on the way events are unfolding. eg. They are pleased that their friends are going to be subject to a grilling by the police. - I wonder has this ever happened before? And how ironic that this is under a legal system where no-one is supposed to speak!
Also whatever happened to CRG the famous SAS team who were supposed to be helping the search? Do they report back to anyone and in particular do the people who contributed to the fund through which they are paid get to know how effective they are being? I imagine they are winching themselves down from helicopters onto some dusty Morroccan hillside as we speak.
Oh and I didn't mention that if they are so pleased that their friends are being questioned why didn't they all volunteer for more questioning rather than waiting? And the McCanns themselves ... dare I mention 40 questions ....
I'd be grateful if any of our Portuguese friends (Carlos?) - or indeed anyone who knows - could answer these questions I posted above:
1 Can arguidos have a PR company working for them?
2 What are the rules governing what arguidos or their representatives can say?
3 Do the McCanns have different rights regarding making public statements in Britain than they do in Portugal?
Right On John!
Regarding the fund, my understanding is it is not to be used for legal fees. The money what's his name gave was to be kept separate (outside the fund) for legal fees, but I could be wrong. As far as C.M. & the PR Agency in Port. it is probably coming out of the fund and if so is utterly disgraceful.
The possibilities of hiding (buring the body) are so many: the sea, the mountains, forest, the lake near PDL, the dam in HUelva. It is enough to drive a few KMs from PDL and you have the algarve mountains that are almost desert of population. I think it will be very hard for the police to find the body.
They are looking in places where they traced comunications by mobile phone, between them.
I think they are trying to get their "image" sorted so that they can gain the "pity" vote if you like. It doesnt matter what they do they will just make things worse if i was to advise them id simply say dont comment.
What i find weird and unable to comprehend is if it were me all i would do is sob and say i want my baby home pleaseeeeeeeeeee give me back my baby - not once have they uttered those words or shown the emotion that one would expect to see and that i feel is their downfall.
Yeah John and Dee,
My thoughts exactly when I read Gs latest entry.
What do you think about my concerns (above) re: how friends lawyers costs might be met?
Liz
Lynn I agree with you and their actions from almost the very beginning have been all about them, including Gerry's (puke) blogs.
Liz I don't know about the fund, but I would assume they may volunteer their own lawyers (so they are in the loop).
Dee said "Kate doesn't want to go back to being a locum GP. She wants a new career in child welfare."
John then asked who could possibly have confidence in her for child welfare. How about Richard Branson, Brian Kennedy & Clarence (the mouth) Mitchell. I would love to know if any of these guys have children and if so would they send them to Maison McCann for a sleepover.
Do we from where payment is being made to the Portuguese P.R. company?
Jose do you choose jury members in Portugal or is it just luck of the draw? Also, out of curiosity, have you ever heard of arguidos hiring a P.R. company to improve their image in case they are charged?
I wonder why they think the Portuguese people have a poor opinion of them. John I know has 40 good reasons but is too much of a gentleman to mention them.
1 I do not know any case where an arguido had a PR company but have never heard that that was not possible.
2 Arguidos can not comment on the investigation and, I assume, not sure, so would be the case for a PR.
3 They can not comment on the investigation, but the PR has done that and the portuguese authorities did not act.
By the way Kate has violate the law at least twice, commenting on the bible page and on the bargain offer by the PJ and thet did not act. She could have a sentence up to 2 years for having done that.
Oh and just for the record, although I completely understand that it would be theoretically possible to cart a semi mumified small body in a suitcase through two airports, customs etc. etc. there is no way I can believe that this happened. What's more, it doesn't fit Gs M.O. it would be far too risky for him, he would not put himself in the possible position of being caught 'red-handed' so to speak. I don't think M left Ptgl.
Liz
From the M. Fund Board:
The Board has taken advice from Bates Wells & Braithwaite London LLP and Christopher McCall QC. The Board has been advised that payment of Gerry and Kate’s legal defence costs would be legally permissible subject to conditions about repayment in the event of a guilty conviction.
The directors of the Fund discussed this today. The two family directors, Brian Kennedy and John McCann withdrew from the meeting when the decision was made. Esther Mcvey chaired the meeting.
The Fund directors realise that there is not only a legal answer and recognise the spirit which underlies the generous donations to Madeleine’s Fund, which it is the directors’ responsibility to steer.
For this reason the Fund directors have decided not to pay for Gerry and Kate’s legal defence costs. We stress that Gerry and Kate have not asked for these costs to be paid. However, people have already called in offering their financial support. Any such fund to pay legal defence costs would have to be separately set up and administered.
So who will pay for the Port. PR firm? Their lawyers suggested it for legal reasons, therefore, it should not come out of the fund...but they will probably spin to look like they are actually looking for their daughter.
http://tinyurl.com/2hx5eb
Finally, at long last, a news article I actually have faith in. Why do I have faith in it? Because the "source" of the information has a name, and he's been directly quoted.
A few interesting excerpts:
Fernando José Pinto Monteiro, the Portuguese Attorney-General, added that the theory that Madeleine had been taken by an abductor should not be ruled out and said that he had no control over officers in the case.
Asked whether, as Portugal
’s top legal officer, he could assure the public that police weren’t acting “freewheel”, Mr Monteiro admitted: “No, I can’t guarantee that. I don’t have control over them.”
He added: “All I know is that no lead should be abandoned. There is no lead strong enough to exclude all others.”
Bolding is mine, because these are the parts I find most interesting.
Our named source, Fernando Monteiro, the Attorney General, can't guarantee that the PJ aren't crooked, says the abductor theory should not be ruled out, and says the evidence against the McCanns is not strong enough to exclude any other theories.
Wow...
Oh, and just FYI, at the bottom of this same article: Clarence Mitchell, the official spokesman for the McCanns, dismissed a report suggesting that Kate McCann was planning a new career in child welfare.
DC Thanks for the link.
I noticed on the last line that CM stated that K '... has not been in touch with or been approached by any children's charity'. This sounds like canvassing on her behalf for her to be approached by 'a children's charity'! There are loads of different jobs in child welfare a large number of which are not working for a charity?
Liz
Im off to bed but one last comment - if it were my child who had been taken or was missing i couldnt comprehend anything let alone thinking about my new career or my protection on my return to work - mr and mrs mccann take my advice and just stop talking!!!!!!!!!
Obviously children's charities are not approaching K because they have drawn the wrong conclusions from her wonderful physical appearance. Once she has put on 2 stone and gets a pair like posh they will be queueing round the block for her services, particularly advice on "family" holidays.
DC | 10.22.07 - 4:41 pm - sorry but those quotes from the attributible source don't mean anything either - have you ever asked a lawyer to guarantee anything? Not likely. And of course all lines are still open until they are formally charged. He's the attorney general!
The Portuguese attorney general is a lot more credible to me than the reporters from the 24Horas who seem to send everyone on a wild goose chase with their made up stories.
It's encouraging to hear that the abduction theory cannot be ruled out.
Yes, there is a 20% chance the dogs are wrong, maybe the bodily fluids are actually from rotting meat or the twins diapers; Kate really did have 6 dead patients that she clung too and in the most unfortunate experience of their lives they are really slowly remembering the events of that night.
I love Justine McGuiness's (lst PR person) quote "Kate's priority at the moment is to be a mother". Oopps that didn't last long either, child welfare???
The Portuguese Attorney-General, of all people, should say exactly that all lines of enquiry are open. No one has been charged with anything. Until that happens, that legal officer could say nothing else. If he did, I think we could conclude that the rule of law in Portugal was compromised, not by the police but by the senior law officer.
The rest of that article is a pretty everyday example of a newspaper trying to make some kind of story out of nothing. In this case it is The Times, and it is not that different to 24 Horas or any other rag desperate for a Maddie headline to fill space and sell papers.
Thinking about the two careers moves in the last two days; both extremely unlikely at this point, given they are both suspects...could it be they are putting that out there that they will have to continue to "tap into the fund"? If so why not call "a spade a spade" and be honest, it is logical the hospital does not want Gerry back until he is cleared and Kate's practice is on hold for the same reason "they want their patients to feel comfortable." People understand and appreciate the truth (no matter how difficult), lies shoved down are throat that do not make sense, we tend to get angry.
A waiter that night speaks http://www.express.co.uk/posts/v...st-be-to-blame-
Dee -
I was just coming over here to post that article. Though I disagree with his conclusions - mainly because he's no more qualified to make statements like that than any of us are - his evidence is interesting.
He says that they had dinner in the resort every night of their stay - the first two nights at the main restaurant *with* the children, and the next three at the tapas bar, without the children but with the full knowledge of the resort staff.
If he's telling the truth, that means they didn't eat at Chaplins, which means that they didn't leave the children alone to go that far away (What was it? Two or three miles?) to eat.
He also confirms that yes, they did check on the children every 20 minutes - which is almost the exact same interval the "room listening" service the resort offers would have had. Again, I disagree with him saying it's suspicious that Kate checked on them, because he has no idea the conversations that led up to that. Maybe she had to use the restroom and decided to check on the kids while she was at it. He - we - have no idea.
But you know what I bet? I bet that those parts of his statements will be overlooked, or forgotten about, or out-right ignored. Actually, in a few other place I lurk frequently, they're already being ignored.
Because it's so much easier to take his "it could only have been someone close," line, combine it with the Chaplins story, throw in a little "they NEVER checked on those children," and take the condemnation of the McCanns to a whole new level.
DC - your lst statement, he is qualified to make an opinion based on what he observed over a course of a number of evenings observing. DC you are the one complaining about sources, now you have an eye witness.
Although many people on this board know of the rumors of Chaplins; we haven't discussed it as it hasn't been published. We try to stick with the so-called facts (LOL) & quotes from the paper that's the best we can do.
DC he didn't say "every 20 minutes, “I remember the men going off to check the children about every 20 minutes.”
Regarding your statement, "I disagree with him saying it's suspicious that Kate checked on them, because he has no idea the conversations that led up to that. Maybe she had to use the restroom and decided to check on the kids while she was at it", very well maybe true, but he backed up why he thought it was unusual: “But it was always the men who went to check, never the women. Why had Kate suddenly gone to check on the children that time, when she never had before? The only time I can remember Kate McCann leaving the table was the night that the little girl disappeared." That is his opinion based on his experience with them.
I agree DC his account is very interesting and two things in particular that sticks out & I have no idea why he said this
“I told them I did not think she had been taken by an abductor. It would not have been possible to be watching their apartment. I told them I did not think she had been taken by an abductor. It would not have been possible to be watching their apartment". The other is "The friend said that Mr Batista’s evidence could back the McCanns’ belief that their daughter was abducted." (LOL insulting intelligence again).
He said: “Kate always felt, in awful hindsight, that the group’s movements were being watched. They believe an abductor took Madeleine.” Does that mean she confided in the staff during the days after...????
Thanks DC for getting me to really go over this article in depth & it really doesn't end just there...geez!
OOPPS! That duplicate line should have been this one "“During the evening the streets are quite deserted in that area. I told them it had to be one of the family or a friend. It had to be someone close.”
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/
home...ticle375336.ece
Very Sad News again for this area: 4 drown trying to save children
WO British mums and a dad drowned with another rescuer battling to save their children from raging seas on holiday yesterday.
One married couple’s two youngsters — among a group of kids struggling in the water — survived as lifeguards and locals plunged into the Atlantic surf.
They and the other children were dragged on to a Portuguese beach — but the brave parents perished, along with a German. The second British woman victim was a mum of two. She plunged in the water to save one of her kids.
Dee - that is terrible news. My heart goes out to everyone involved. Those children will most definitely know how much their parents loved them... though whether that is a good thing or a bad thing, only time will tell.
Now... back to the waiter.
You're right, Dee. He is more qualified than we here on the comments, because he actually did interact with them during their stay at the resort. And he has every right to state his opinions as they are built on the facts he observed... I just happen to disagree with some of his opinions, is all. Not all of them, mind you. Just some of them.
And here's something I'm just really confused about. I'm not nitpicking at all... I'm just not understanding what you mean, and that bothers me. (The not understanding part, that is.)
I said He also confirms that yes, they did check on the children every 20 minutes...
And you said DC he didn't say "every 20 minutes,
Then quoted him from the article “I remember the men going off to check the children about every 20 minutes.”
Maybe I'm just dense, but I'm really not getting how he didn't say "every 20 minutes" when he said "going off to check the children every 20 minutes."
Report, received yesterday, reveals relationship between Murat and Maddie’parents
They are friends and nobody knew?
Robert Murat and Maddie’s parents will not loose their status as arguido so soon. According to a preliminary report sent yesterday by the Polícia Judiciária (PJ) to the procurator of the Republic of the district of Portimăo, José Cunha de Magalhăes e Menezes, there are serious suspicions of a relationship and an eventual connection between Murat and the McCann couple, existing before the disappearance of Maddie.
The Portuguese Authorities should have called for the cooperation of the English Police to investigate this suppositions and the believed dissimulations between the three arguidos in the British territory. “This is under investigation and it s almost confirmed”, reported a source within the Polícia Judiciária (PJ). The term “almost” used by the police officer may describe that all the suspicions, present in the report, were unused as evidence to alter the present measure of coercion of three arguidos. Such as, the Judge of criminal instruction in charge of this case, Pedro Frias, according to the conviction of the investigators, should not alter the measure of coercion of the (three) arguidos. “We are convinced that (their status) would not be altered”, said the same source. The investigators believe that Gerry and Murat knew each other in Leicester during the campaign of the cardiologist for the Labour Party. Remember that Murat has an ex-wife; he used to visit his daughter and his sister in England on a regular basis. However, during the investigations detailed in the preliminary report, Kate and Gerry said that didn’t know Robert Murat, and vice versa. Also Tuck Price, the friend and spokesman of Murat, guaranteed to the 24Horas that the English didn’t know the McCanns. “He only knew them after what happen in Praia da Luz”, said the friend.
In the ten-volume report of the inquiry, in addition to the inquiries, there is also a number of expertise tests performed in England. The investigation, according to the police source, wasn’t closed and the other issue that must be verified in a laboratory is the paternity of Maddie (such as reported the 24Horas).
In a note sent yesterday to the redaction, the Attorney General of the Portuguese Republic, Pinto Monteiro, notifies that the investigation -that continues in the hands of the Ministério Público is going to be directly followed by the General Prosecutor from the district of Evora, Luís Bilro Verăo. He will nominate a Prosecutor to continue the present work, until now done by Magalhăes e Menezes, Prosecutor in the judicial district of Portimăo. In the time of ten days, counting since yesterday, “it would be pronounced a resolution concerning the realization of the necessary diligences and the call to the adequate mechanisms of international cooperation
The above article is from the 24Horas.
and the measures to take, that is relatively to the situation of the arguidos”, related Pinto Monteiro.
In the same note, the General Attorney of the Portuguese Republic revealed that it was the PJ who has subjected the arguidos Gerry and Kate McCann to the “term of identity and residence”, “by being known that in that moment it was the only possible measure of coercion, regarding the elements of evidence until then collected”.“The investigation is not closed, it justifies the realization of news diligences from which it would be appreciate the possible measures of coercion and the necessary international cooperation”, he explained. The judge of the tribunal of Portimăo who is going to finish his job, closes the phase of inquiry, the thousand pages of the the-volumes inquiry in the ‘Maddie case’ is Pedro Frias and is, literally, a man of the south (of Portugal). According to an information reported by the 24Horas, the judge affected to the criminal instruction has been transferred recently more than 8 days ago, to the district of Lagos, where he has directed the 2° Criminal Tribunal since 1993. Before Lagos, Pedro Miguel dos Anjos Frias was in the district of Ourirque. Transferred to Portimăo on his requirement, Frias would have in his hands the future of the McCanns, considered today as the main suspects in the death of their own daughter. In this procedure phase (of inquiry) the intervention of the judge only will occur if the Ministério Público asks for the realization of diligences.
The above article was published in 12/09/2007
24Horas 23/10/2007
Hair and fluid Analysis don’t conclude if the toddler was alive or dead
Maddie’s vestiges found in the house of Robert Murat
The Portuguese authorities are convinced that they have collected vestiges -hair and bodily fluids- that proves that Madeleine McCann was present in the villa of Robert Murat, the luso-british constituted as arguido in the inquiry concerning the disappearance of the little girl, the last May 3, in Praia da Luz, Lagos, Algarve.
“When the searches were carried out in the house of the suspect it was detected several evidences that indicate that Maddie has been in this house. It makes faith from the expertise performed by the Scientific Police Laboratory and the National Institute of Legal Medicine”, revealed to the 24Horas a high officer of the PJ. These diligences, said the same source, were performed after the car has been rent by the McCanns, in which it was also found bodily fluids of the toddler.
“Enough time to occult the body and dispose of it”, said the same source. The problem is that the evidence is not conclusive. “It is still impossible to say in an absolute way that the vestiges pertain to a person alive or dead”, reports the same source. “(She) could have been there alive”. Under the scrutinity is also the relationship between the luso-british and the Maddie’s parents. “Although [Murat] denied knowing the McCanns, we were already able to conclude that this fact doesn’t correspond to the truth. They [Murat and the McCanns] knew each other. Nevertheless, the fact that Maddie has been in the house of Murat isn’t sufficient to prove that he has occulted her body. She could have been there alive”, said the same officer. Also an officer of the National Institute of Legal Medicine from Lisbon confirmed that some tests were done to the vestiges collected in the house and the cars of Robert Murat by the inspectors of the PJ and affirmed that is the possibility that the body was hidden there. The samples in question were collected during two different searches, the 10th of June and 4th of August. When he was kept and constituted as arguido, the 14th of May, Murat did not see his house being combed. It has been impossible to know in which of these diligences it was found the vestiges that could incriminate the luso-british in the alleged disappearance of the toddler.
Another source within the investigation has reported that “only with the arrival of all the expertise [ordered to the forensic laboratory of Birmingham] that we could obtain certainties”.
Meanwhile, the lawyers of the McCanns will send a list with the names of 25 persons to the British authorities. The aim is ‘to help to clean the name of the couple’ and to orient the inquiry of the Portuguese authorities in the direction of the search of the little Madeleine.
The McCanns continues to maintain the theory of the abduction.
From Dee's link to the express article: “The holiday block could be seen, and the upper floor of the apartment where Maddie slept was in their line of vision.”
What is this? Now there is an upper floor to the apt? I thought Pamela Fenn lived upstairs. The floor showed one floor with two bedrooms. I think this article is a 'plant' but strangely I feel it was planted by Team McCann. If it is refuted in the next few days by CM then I will be sure of that, that it may be part of the McCann defense strategy as has been suggested before on this brilliant board .
@ Chanel: I am inclined to agree with you it is a matter of semantics. The holiday block could be seen (the entire building) and the upper floor of the apartment where Maddie slept (let us say for example she stayed in 30/2) and 30/4 was in line of vision. This would be strictly a correct statement but is a terrible misuse of the language, if it has indeed been put out to further confuse the issue.
If I am correct then what this statement means is that the Tapas 9 grew comfort and security for the children because they could see Pamela Fenns windows! If I am wrong then I shall apologise. Please, please prove me wrong.
Stanley I am not even going to try. I meant to say that the floorPLAN showed only one floor, sorry for the typo, but we have seen a floorplan and I think we could assume that it at least is correct...well maybe.
I always feel better when I can see Ms Fenn's windows, I'll tell you that!
Also while we have been discussing cars available to whomever, would the resort itself have had a car available to any guest? I have never heard of such thing but I have never had the good fortune to vacation in Europe let alone beautiful Portugal.
And thank you to Jose, Mirilia and Martina for all your posts and translations. Yes Marilia I think all this political finagling smells to high heaven!
And if Kate were contemplating a new career in child welfare (gag), I would believe that desire stemmed from a guilty conscience.
DC I was just trying to point out he said "about" every 20 minutes, which to me implies or leaves the door open that it could have been 15 or 30 minutes, but confirms regular checks.
Wow, this Murat bombshell...very interesting, not sure if it is true. I am finding it hard to swallow. What a twist, I didn't see this one coming at all. Maybe they only borrow his car like he said in the article yesterday above somewhere, but it implied in his house too?
On interviewing the friends:
The aim is "to help to clean the name of the couple’ and to orient the inquiry of the Portuguese authorities in the direction of the search of the little Madeleine." So...will they answer all the questions????
Chanel,good eye! I didn't pick up on the upstairs floor.
The "investigators" with c4 stated no way the window/door could be seen from tapas bar
RE: the board financing the mccanns - another pr ploy
Of course they wont do it and it looks "good" for the mccanns they dont
but the mccanns dont need the money with the donations branson and such like haven given
i still do think they are innocent and murat did it
Lynn said "i still do think they are innocent and murat did it." If Murat did it (I don't think he did but more later) why has he not hired a firm of P.R. consultants, sorry update, 2 firms of P.R. consultants (I am including Clarence), 4 teams of lawyers and the British Prime Minister, Richard Branson etc, etc. Does this arguido not know how a suspect is meant to prove his innocence.
I do not believe Murat did it because I have imagined him 2 stone heavier, with a large cleavage, no way Jose. Sorry for the pun to our Portuguese friend!
Dee, you wrote:
"He said: ?Kate always felt, in awful hindsight, that the group?s movements were being watched. They believe an abductor took Madeleine.? Does that mean she confided in the staff during the days after...????"
Actually, this was not the waiter speaking but a 'close friend of the couple', responding to Mr Batista’s evidence.
If Kate felt that then it beggars belief why the hell would you leave the kids alone if you were feeling uneasy about something.
"The PJ seem to be grasping more and more at anything to just "close" this case rather than think logically and work together" freom mirror blog - the intentional leaks are there to make us think that i believe and i think it wont be long before the PJ actually come to the correct conclusion - at the end of the day they have that many theories one of them has to stick!!!
Re Stanly do you choose jury members in Portugal or is it just luck of the draw?
In Portugal, an arguido can choose to have a trial with a jury if the offense -the arguido is charged with- may result in a sentence of 8 years or more. The arguido must do a writing requirement if he want a jury. (Art 13 of the Portuguese Procedure Penal Code)
The Jury is selected according to the procedure defined in the Decreto-Lei (Order in Council) 387-A/87, 29th of December 1987, Artşs 3ş, 4ş, 5ş, 6ş e 7ş.
http://www.pgdlisboa.pt/pgdl/lei...icha=1&
pagina=1
In a first time, a list of Jury names is selected in random order by a special trial from an electoral list of names. Next, an inquiry is performed. And finally, the names of the Jury are again selected in random order. The defense or the Ministério Público can excuse two juries without explanation.
Jose, thank you. Very much the same as here except for the 8 year requirement. As far as choosing jurors is concerned whoever comes to trial, if ever, will be tried by a jury of normal citizens. It is perverse is it not that in a country that prides itself on secrecy so much has been said in the Portuguese press that the McCanns see fit to hire a P.R. firm. As you can probably tell I do not like this couple but you either have secrecy, in which case 24 horas is closed by the government, or you change the law. Quite honestly in this day and age of internet technology keeping a secret is as difficult as keeping your virginity in Glasgow.
Jose/Stanley: can anything be read into the fact that the Portugese authorities have not shut the press in Portugal up. For instance if what they are reporting is wrong, not factual and just press invention then would it be a breach of any secrecy law in any case. Is it a breach to misreport? In fact is it a breach to publish interviews with witnesses, or is the breach only by the witness speaking?
The McCanns may have rather cleverly hid behind the secrecy law on those occasions where they declined to speak, knowing that we don't really know what a breach is and what is not.
Correio da Manhă Today:
New Law: Defense hopes that the Luso-British would be cleared
Proceedings may be public in three weeks
The couple will have access to the proceedings in a short time, unless there are new accusations.
Six months after the Ministério Público declared officially Robert Murat arguido, suspected in the abduction of Madeleine, the defense of the Luso-British but also Kate and Gerry McCann may have access to the proceedings.
The inquiry may become public the 14th of November and the Lawyer of the Luso-British, Francisco Pagarete, reported yesterday to the Correio da Manhă, in that day, he hopes “to be notified of the filling of the acts” done in relation to his client.
This possibility occurred after the entry into force of the (new) Procedure Penal Code, which spirit is now the publicity and not the secrecy. All the proceedings would be public under pain of nullity and the MP must require, on a case by case basis, what should be put under the justice secrecy.
If the times are not fulfilled, the secrecy could not be extended. It could be only in the case of crimes punished with more than 8 years of imprisonment or for a particularly complex case. “I don’t know what is the crime of my client, but it was said to me that he was only suspected to be involved in the disappearance of the toddler”, assures Francisco Pagarete, who don’t see any reason to extend the justice secrecy in this case.
The same omission of crime notification happened with Kate and Gerry McCann. No information has been given to them during the interviews, but the CM knows that the PJ has only evidences for the crimes of the occultation of a body and negligent homicide. Preventive jail is not necessary for these crimes and also it wasn’t necessary to increase the time of the inquiry. It would happen only if the PJ notifies the case in another form.
Sorry Jose I think John and I are on the same track here.
Question: When is a secret not a secret in the U.K.?
Answer: When it is published by the press.
Question: When is a secret still a secret in Portugal?
Answer: When it is published by the press.
What John is saying which is correct is that if 24 horas were here in the U.K. the McCanns would have to have sued them for they would look guilty if they did not. However the laws of secrecy have allowed them to say they are not allowed to comment. I unlike others do not think the Portuguese police are inferior to ours (both lots appear pretty bloody useless) but they do seem to be working on an unrealistic basis.
The Healy were interviewed yesterday in the spanish antena 3
http://www.vertele.com/noticias/...il.php?
id=16783
"Kate McCann's mother Susan Healy revealed details of the conversation in an interview broadcast today on Spanish television. Mrs Healy, 61, recalled the first words uttered by her son-in-law when he rang her at home in Liverpool: "There's been a disaster, it's a disaster."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
pages...in_page_id=1770
Quest, chairman Lord Steven
Isn't this the company that the McCanns have hired???
If so, is LS being payed by them to say what they want????
http://www.quest.co.uk/
I found in mirror forum people relating what was happening in the spanish interview. It is very interesting.
Antena 3 is lauching a special show about crime investigations, I understood, and have a panel of journalists, criminologistd, psychiatrists (spell?) who after the interviews make their comments.
http://forums.mirror.co.uk/
viewt...p=565710#565710
Marilia | 10.23.07 - 1:46 pm - have the McCanns hired this company? To do what?
To search for Maddy
Marilia | 10.23.07 - 3:08 pm :Really? I thought that was CRG (Control Risk Group) is this the same people?
I do not know that was precisely what I was asking
On that Forum, there is talk about another suspect being announced on Wednesday. I am not sure where this information comes from.
Has anybody else heard of it?
K.
No which forum, sorry missing some posts.
On the Mirror's Forum, given above by Marilia at 1:34pm.
oops...sorry, Marilia quoted the Mirror Forum at 2:19pm (not 1:34pm)
I hear a rumour that the phonecall Gerry made to his mother in law when madeleine went missing was that he stated "there has been a disaster" now come on!!!!!!!!!!! your gorgeous little girl goes missing, god knows what has happened and you describe it as a disaster - either this man is deluded or just has no idea how to deal with anything. I cannot even comprehend how i would speak but I would be "connected" to the situation everything he does "disassociates" himself from things. Actually that is a good point, that is what he does, he disassociates himself from this situation with his impersonal speech and language - why though, why do this??????
Tis strange - but true; for truth is always strange; stranger than fiction. Lord Byron
thanks for link Karina will check it out now
...and the fact that Kate asked for a priest right away is also strange. Even her mother thought it was odd and said that the McCanns were not devout catholics...
I wonder if the McCanns attended church every Sunday before Madeleine disappeared.
If the parents' interview was engineered by Mitchell, I don't think it worked. The interview did not help the McCanns at all.
Got this:
"Due to an żaccident? Madeleine was very badly injured. She could not be taken to hospital because it would have caused a serious investigation. She was taken to the church where arrangements were made to tend for her in private. (Sanctuary where no one would search. the McCann’s did spend a lot of time behind doors) hoping that Madeleine would recover."
from here
http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewt...pic.php?
t=23084
(i know! I know! another crazy theory)
But wait yes, its a good one - maybe she was taken to another apartment (not the church). After she'd had an accident - the boys (Doctors) say to Kate 'go ... go we'll look after her' - 'its going to be ok' and so on. then Kate goes back to look "they've taken her"... "they've taken her ... why?" 'Why? Kate, I'm sorry she didn't make it ... but we've got a plan ... " A plan to save your neck and ours for not reporting the accident n the first place. "Come on we'd all better stick together or we'll all be in the proverbial. It was nobodies fault it was just an accident ... these things happen." " Kate come on - have the cuddle cat it'll make you feel better."
Its possible.
Karina, Kate didn't go to church regularly before Maddy went missing. After she went missing, she went everyday in Port. When she returned home, she went once a week.
John, yeah saw that on mirror forum... has legs but walks a little wobbley for me.
Dee, where did you get the info. that K & G didn't attend church as regs before Ptgl?
Liz
"Actually that is a good point, that is what he does, he disassociates himself from this situation with his impersonal speech and language - why though, why do this??????"
Because people do that when they are in shock. It's natural.
Liz - what's the wobbly bits?
1) Kate doesn't know how serious it is so she keeps it together at Tapas Bar
2) Involves others in the whole thing including body disposal
3) Explains sniffer dogs tracking her scent to another apartment
Tell me your reservations.
Liz it came from an article I found and I just scanned down through as I believe I found & posted that article, just scanned down through, must be on the old thread. "It has occurred to me if she was near the church perhaps that is one reason why Kate went to church everyday, yet when see went home to UK she went once a week?"
Dee | 10.12.07 - 6:03 pm | #
But I see if I can find the actual article.
Lynn
It is not a rumour it was K's mother who told that in the Antena3 interview.
There is a bit of it in video at www.antena3.es
John, your point 2 - wasn't that always the stumbling block for you? I remember you said before that you find it hard to imagine that others would be involved. What made you change your mind?
Once more re mummification of dead bodies: extreme cold, very low humidity, or (total) lack of air is needed for mummification. But I don't think this is what is meant here. Here we want to know when the wet stage of decomposition is over and the body is dry and doesn't smell or leak fluids anymore.
The wet putrefaction stage can be over quickly - quote from Wikipedia
"The speed at which decomposition occurs varies greatly. Factors such as temperature, humidity, and the season of death all determine how fast a fresh body will skeletonize or mummify. A basic guide for the effect of environment on decomposition is given as Casper's Law (or Ratio): when there is free access of air a body decomposes twice as fast than if immersed in water and eight times faster than if buried in earth. The most important variable is a body's accessibility to insects, particularly flies. On the surface in tropical areas, invertebrates alone can easily reduce a fully fleshed corpse to clean bones in under two weeks."
I doubt that M would be hidden somewhere on an open surface, so it would take longer than 2 weeks for sure. But in a shallow grave or only covered with leaves etc at these temperatures my guess would be that after 6 weeks she might be not much more than bones. She was small after all.
If hidden in a fridge or freezer decomposition would have stopped of course.
This is if she died, of course.
Before responding to above I found this slo-motion vid of a sky interview re: G & K 100 days in responding to Q re: sitings of M.
Now I know we shouldn't read too much into these... but let me know what you think:
http://picasaweb.google.com/
sv..........2930637026
John, the main wobbly bit for me is that G would not involve anyone else.
Knowledge is power and he won't share that unless he is absolutley forced to.
Re: K and sniffer dogs I can agree with you there's interesting facts to be unearthed...
Martina - "John, your point 2 - wasn't that always the stumbling block for you? I remember you said before that you find it hard to imagine that others would be involved. What made you change your mind?"
To be honest it had not occured to me that she may have died through complications or after being tended or nursed for a period. This would draw the other doctor(s) in, in a way which would make them complicit, rather than being just willing to stick up for a friend. I didn't think just supplying a sedative was enough. But if she died in someone's care then that puts a different light. Anyway I haven't really changed my mind I was just exploring this idea and genuinely thought someone might shoot it down for me.
This is also interesting from Wikipedia:
"In a temperate climate, it usually requires three months to several years for a body to completely decompose into a skeleton, depending on factors such as temperature, presence of insects, and submergence in a substrate such as water. In the tropics, skeletonization can occur in weeks, while in the Andes Mountains or tundra, skeletonization will never occur if subzero temperatures persist.
The rate of skeletonization and the present condition of the corpse can be used to determine the time of death.
After skeletonization has occurred, the skeleton of mid to large size mammals such as humans takes about twenty years under optimal conditions to be completely dissolved by acids in the soil leaving no trace of the organism. In neutral pH soil or sand, the skeleton will persist for at least several thousand years before it finally disintegrates."
Has Portugal a temperate climate? Since it was summer she might have skeletonized faster than 3 months.
If she died on May 3rd, she will now certainly only be bones.
Sorry, this is harsh ... but maybe the reality.
If the link above does not work try pasting this, you have to click on the right hand arrow every frame.
http://picasaweb.google.com/
svsp...731972930637026
Liz
Liz - your link doesn't work for me.
Also don't you think the 'other person' as a doctor who tried to treat her is a convincing way for another person to be involved.
Imagine she had an accident while under Kate's care. They don't realise how serious it is but Gerry and A. N. Other take her off her hands and say they will sort things out. It all goes wrong and she dies. Then if they report it they are in serious do-dos not only for leaving the kids but for not reporting the accident.
Liz - he looks like he's smirking. She looks saddened and then covers up. They both look like they are sharing a secret. But hey could mean nothing at all.
Lizbee, what is this video or these pictures supposed to show? I can't see anything weird.
John, Yes I do and if G was to give/share power with anyone then it would be a respected peer. Like I said the theory has legs,
Liz
Hey the vid may not amount to a stack of beans but it's out there and I thought you may be interested.
I thought their smirking a little chilling myself but what do I know. I haven't (thankfully) had any child go missing on my watch so I'm not sure how I'd react... but I don't think it would be the McCann way.
Liz
"Imagine she had an accident while under Kate's care. They don't realise how serious it is but Gerry and A. N. Other take her off her hands and say they will sort things out. It all goes wrong and she dies. Then if they report it they are in serious do-dos not only for leaving the kids but for not reporting the accident."
I speculated almost the same on a former thread here, and then you said you can't easily believe someone else would be involved.
Seems you changed your mind after all. This is the only plausible scenario imo.
Apart from abduction which I haven't ruled out yet.
Martina - just goes to show that you are several steps ahead of me - but don't let it go to your head - being smarter than me don't mean much
The only thing I'm ahead of you is in time zones
Is it true that they found evidence of Madeleine being in Murat's house, I wonder? Or another invention?
(Btw, I squirm at the fact that more and more people here and elsewhere call Madeleine simply M. I don't like it.)
Since the very first time I posted I have always referred to all parties in their first or first and last initials. This is not disrespect or distancing myself merely because it's quicker. By the way in the 'early days' the Mccanns were disgusted in Madeleine being referred to as Maddy or Maddie and said they never had used those shortened versions of her name... but they soon changed their tune on that... because the shorter alternatives kept her name in the press.
Liz
http://tinyurl.com/2e3uez
Here is a summary of the interview in the Daily Mail.
Lizbee, I know, and I also happily write G+K etc. But I have always avoided writing a mere M for Madeleine, somehow, for me, it just doesn't feel right.
Never mind, I didn't mean to critisice anybody, just expressing my personal feelings.
Are they searching this lake? Nothing anymore about it apart from announcements last week that they would search it. Jose, have you read anything about it?
Re Stanley What John is saying which is correct is that if 24 horas were here in the U.K. the McCanns would have to have sued them for they would look guilty if they did not.
However the laws of secrecy have allowed them to say they are not allowed to comment.
Your questions are about the conflicts existing between different principles: the right to the information, the liberty of information and expression, the principle of presumption of innocence in one hand and in the other hand the principle of the secret of Justice.
I agree with you that the Portuguese law (in the old Procedure Penal Code) puts clearly a limit on the right to be informed and the liberty of information and expression concerning the criminal procedure under justice secrecy.
However, don’t conclude that the Polícia Judiciara is prohibited to furnish to the press synthetic reports about their investigations.
A derogation to the principle of the justice secrecy in a criminal procedure is possible when it is strictly asked by the participants involved in the verification of the criminal facts or under the responsibility of their officers and when it is performed in a manner that does not violate the principle of presumption of innocence of the arguido and do not to cause serious prejudice to the interests of the protection of the private life of the persons involved in the procedure.
In other words, if a policeman or a newspaper violates the presumption of innocence of the arguido he should be condemned. The secrecy law don’t say that an arguido is not allowed to sue anybody who violates the principle of the presumption of his innocence.
Re Martina There is nothing in the press concerning searches near the dam. This information came from the 24Horas but it has been dismissed the next day by the Correio da Manhă.
i've stopped posting recently cos i can't get my head around it all. So many conflicting reports... I really don't know what to think any more. Kate's mum both supporting and dropping kate in it. Same with the waiter. Robert Murat cleared then back in the frame. The parents are prime suspects but continuing to 'campaign' and 'direct' the investigation. Kate suddenly going on spanish tv and crying (sorry but seems so set up).
Where are the results of the dna testing? Why don't the portuguese police charge the parents if they have the tests back? If they don't have enough evidence then they should stop this trial by innuendo...
I guess i've got mccann fatigue...finally! All my friends and family have been complaining about my mini obsession.
pdg - most of what we read is pure nonsense - the only significant thing this week is that the friends are due to be interviewed. I still believe and I don't know why, that the PJ are moving slowly but irrevocably towards a definitive version of events. I think that for them there is no need to rush. I also think that abduction is losing out heavily to accident on the likely outcome.
24Horas
Three Portuguese policemen are going to Leicester
How the PJ will grill the McCanns?
The Polícia Judiciária will try to clarify in England all the doubts concerning what happen that fateful night, May 3, confronting the McCanns, their family members and the friends with questions that are still to clarify after the several interviews following the disappearance of Madeleine from Praia da Luz. The questions are in a document of tens page and more than a hundred of questions, mainly in connection with the analysis of the events done by all the persons linked to the Couple. The British Authorities would conduct all the interrogations.
The 24Horas reports that three elements of the PJ would be sent to England, probably this week; they would give in hand the letter rogatory. After completing this formality, the English Policemen should interview the parents of Madeleine and their friends that were present the day that the toddler vanished. Although the alarm rose just after 22h30, the PJ believes that there are discrepancies in the different versions of the persons involved but also that Maddie may have disappeared before that moment (although the investigators have the conviction that she died as the consequence of an accident - in the stairs of the apartment).
The Portuguese policemen only could assist to the interrogatory, but all the questions would be made by the detectives of the homicide unit of Leicester. The Portuguese investigators are not allowed to question directly anybody. "But it’s important to have the Portuguese investigators present in the room of interrogations, because they may return to analyze their gesture and facial expressions of what hey have seen. That is also part of the criminal investigation. It’s the so-called behavioral analysis", explained to the 24Horas a high ranking judicial officer closed to the investigation.
During the interviews the Portuguese policemen could suggest new questions to her English colleague, but those would only formulate by them, if they want. In other words, they can only do question that are in the letter rogatory and they are not obliged to take into account the suggestions of their Portuguese colleagues.
"The same happen in Portugal when it is necessary to interrogate a national citizen suspected of a crime, we do the question. The foreign policemen could give suggestions, but only that. That s the institutional rules", added a high officer of the PJ.
John is exactly right, most of what we read is pure nonsense, though the media campaign is fascinating to observe. I would certainly be interested in seeing the Spanish tv interviews with the Healeys and the McCanns, but from what I have read they will do little more than confirm what I already think about the family and the case, on the basis of the facts as I see them.
It is facts which will determine the outcome of the Madeleine mystery. We do not know what the forensic evidence and the further questioning ("rogatory") of the tapas group will reveal. I am not holding my breath for a result, and indeed the police need to make sure that what they present if there were to be a prosecution will stand not just judicial or jury scrutiny but also some very strong diplomatic and political testing as well.
In the absence of final confirmation of the reported evidence of Madeleine being dead in or near the apartment, abduction remains a possibility; and "wandering off" too (though for reasons we have discussed at length here, my view is that they remain unlikely). To the extent which that evidence were to be confirmed, the involvement of the parents in some way becomes very much more likely.
The daily star is quoting the paper of 24Horas published yesteday concerning the evidences found in the house of Murat:
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/...in-Murat-house/
I agree Pdg my family think im obsessed - i am!!! I just want her hime safe, I got quiet upset when i actually realised its been almost 7 months since Madeleine disappeared - shes always in my thoughts so i guess doesn't seem that long. I think re: the stills when Gerry smiles I imagined if it were me I may smile too, in hope, in remembrance of my daughter, I don't know but i dont read anything into it
@ Jose The Star once quoted Princess Diana was reborn or something like that - take it with pinch of salt
Having looked at a number of photos of Gerry I noticed that he quite ofetn has a kind of half smile - so I agree that nothing can be read into this. It is odd though that peole who invest so much in PR and so on can evoke so much projected hate. I keep having to force myself to remain neutral.
I am finding myself starting to think give the McCanns a break - no one lets up on criticising them - deservedly so at times but then I have to remind myself, if they are innocent, this is horrific treatment. I think I would breakdown if in their shoes. I do still think they were wrong to leave them but everyone, mainly Madeleine has paid that price.
Most people on this blog know my views so I shall post this without comment. Must read stuff!
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/po...osts/view/
22952
Also I heard on Sky News that Team McCann have set up a 24/7 hotline where you can phone (manned by family and friends) with information and be updated. I shall phone later and ask if any of the Tapas 9 had hire cars on 3rd May. Do you think they will know?
Sorry I saw Sky News when I was in the gym. Please do not get the wrong impression, I am to work-outs what Mike Tyson was to needlework. However I did not have my earphones plugged in. The telephone line is to be manned by private dicks and is for Portugal and Spain. So I thought maybe Jose you would phone instead of me and ask if any of the tapas 9 had a hire car on 3rd May? Somebody, somewhere must know musn't they?
I presume this phone line is the brain child of the newly appointed Portuguese P.R. company. Brilliant! Fools and their money and all that....
re: the link to express
To say they werent holding hands etc one of them must have said "itll be ok to leave the kids we are only over the road" or words to that effect so there has to be somewhere at sometime a "distance" and "blame" must have occured so of course there will be friction.
er: tennis playing, i think we are all more than aware now the guys a muppet
Lynn - is Gerry the first muppet-arguido in history?
@John: No a Mr Kermit Frog was accused of sexual assault on a Senora Piggy. However 24 horas revealed D.N.A. evidence showing he was only guilty of having bacon for breakfast.
However during his time as an arguido there is no evidence that he ever played tennis. Very suspicious!
There is an article about the last interview of the McCann in the Spanish Newspaper El Mundo, with a small video:
http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/
20...1193165911.html
Another video about the interview:
http://www.antena3.com/360grados/
Try this link:
http://tinyurl.com/3anemy
Edited By Siteowner
Concerning the supposed sedation of the children,
they said:
Kate: You know, I won't even go
answer that question,
I am affraid.
Gerry: I mean
It s ludicrous,
and you know
this sort of question
in the publish alot of them
are non sense
we should given the time of day
There is absolutely no suggestion that Madeleine,
ah mmm,
our children
was drugged and
that's outrageous!
Why don't they just say no! rather than "I won't answer" or "There is absolutely no suggestion that Madeleine,
ah mmm,
our children
was drugged and
that's outrageous!"
Actually there is a suggestion! but maybe its wrong. The muppet is challenged in the language department.
Is it just me or has the thread gone funny? Bits missing from what is written?
Hello all
Here is a very good account of KM's parents interview for Antena3 with the analysis of the experts invited to the programme
oops lol
http://julietpain.blogspot.com/
The very long link Jose posted appears to have put the formatting out of kilter. Perhaps Steve/admin can fix? The link could be deleted and replaced with a tinyurl?
Muito obrigado Marilia - I have to say I'm finding all this body language stuff a bit hard to take. Even the por old grandparents are getting it now. She squeezed his finger - so she had something to hide (merda!).
In the video Gerry actually says 'ludicrous' in response to the sedatives question. I know there are cases where the guilty party gave themselves away in interviews but I really think we've got past that now. Have we forced Kate to cry on camera by calling her hard faced and so on.
Nothing wrong with the thread from here Stanley.
I agree with you John about the body language, but I find interesting the phone call of GM saying that there had been a disaster.
"Kate´s mum says she said something like "no, that can´t be" - to which Gerry immediately stressed it was important they accept that Madeleine had been abducted.
Only an hour had gone past since she had been discovered missing."
The fact that KM's mom says they were not so devout catholics before.
In my opinion the parents know what happened because Kate told her mother, or they very much suspect what has happened (accidental killing)
Marilia - they know but are willing to be used? Why? to save their daughter from jail I suppose.
I said:
The very long link Jose posted appears to have put the formatting out of kilter.
Can I add:
In some browsers.
And repeat:
Perhaps Steve/admin can fix?
The link could be deleted and replaced with a tinyurl?
Steve, any chance? Cheers!
Thanks Steve what an accommodating siteowner you are!
No problem. As often as I change stuff around, I owe it to people (especially a civil bunch like the folks posting here) to help wherever possible.
Steve: Please tell us, as you never did, how we can pay some money toward the site. As we explained Pay Pal would not work without a sate and a zip code for those of us in the "Old Worlde"
May I also add my thanks to Reasonable's for rectifying the site. I couldn't understand my own posting, but that's nothing new!
@ John and Stanley ha ha ha muppet is infact actually the perfect term to describe MrMcCann, I thought long and hard about the perfect word and as the dictionary states a muppet is by Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English "a stupid person" and I didn't want to be that mean.
With regards to the theory Kate told her mum what she had done if she did anything. That wouldn't surprise, it might explain the lack of "maternal" care. If my daughter or granddaughter had gone missing I would have been there in a flash, swum if I had to, nothing would stop me nor would anything make me leave as long as my daughter was there i would stay because that is what a mum does.
Lynn sorry I think most of Kates problems have come from her Mum. God that woman gets no sympathy from me. A stick insect with no chest, what sort of maternal figure did she cut for her daughter. I think she was quite right not to go rushing of to Portugal to help, for all I know she does not even play tennis! What use could Gerry have found for her that one of his own family were not already doing. Unless she has a law degree, or one in P.R. or is a "shamus" what could she do? Jogging partner for K if she had been there on 4th May? Suppose G could have sent her to collect the freebie wine from the restaurant rather than lowering himself to do it and even Wimbledon allow ball girls, but I think her age might go against her. Lets face it if your daughter had married Kermit would you want to speak to the press?
Oh I agree with you Stanley, any problems Kate may have emotional or otherwise have to stem from the lack of "love" and "maternal" love that she clearly hasnt got. That was my whole point if Kate were my daughter I would not have left her side and would have been there to support her every step of the way and would show an united front - unlike Kates mum - why does she do that??????
RE: Gerry's disassociation I agree shock causes that but he still isnt in shock, perhaps denial, perhaps Kates tears in this interview will let us see the "warmth" we would expect to see from an emotional mother who lost her child.
Lynn, I'm not sure that crocodile tears will help K. at this point.
Gosh I leave you guys 24 hrs and we're suddenly at Fraggle Rock. Kate thought she was marrying a prince and he turned out to be Kermit the frog!
No real news is not good news in this case because the void appears once again to be filled with rubbish.
There's nothing new in the stories of them either playing tennis or jogging, though it still beggars belief that they were able to do this so soon after Ms dissappearance when most of us would either be out there searching or curled up in a ball, but I was interested in the news that were enjoying freebie wine from the bar on a regular basis taken up to their room... can't put my finger on quite why this irked me... it just seems incongrous... your daughter's missing and you're having an extended holiday, tennis, pool, jogging, drinking with no bar tab... ?
Liz
see the kate and gerry interview here http://news.sky.com/skynews/live.../
livenewsevents
I am not sure if Kate and Gerry just do not know how to express themselves ..."life is not as happy with Madeleine" they need to let go of their control i think.
Lynn,
Thanks for the link. Hmmm, the cynic in me says that they've got used to these interviews by now and know how to work them. The passionate belief in me says that these are genuine parents under duress desperate to get their child home. The intelligence in me says... hang on a moment there's much wrong with this case, genuine inconsistencies, lies even, what about the DNA, the timeline, the '40' questions unanswered. Wherein lies the dilemma... thankfully I too have my personal belief that truth, fairness and justice find a way and all will right itself again... eventually.
This is not going to be settled to everyone's preferred options any time soon, but eventually the truth will out and misdemeanors admonished.
Liz
No problem Liz, I too pray the truth comes out but deep down I look at them and I cannot believe they could hurt Madeleine, yet another part of me hopes they accidentally did for the fear of what she may be going through now breaks my heart.
Lynn: Just watched Gerry on Sky T.V. interview you posted. My abject apologies to Kermit, you are a caring, feeling, warm blooded animal, all comparisons with Gerry McCann were totally false and should my lawyers hear from yours Mr Frog we will immediately settle out of court.
I don't think they need to let go of their control - if that's what they're are. I think they are perfectly entitled to be as controlled or uncontrolled as they want to be. I don't understand why people always keep picking on them. I read with amazement all the assessments and analysis and judgments of these two people - all I see are two very sad persons that hang on by a shred to keep life as normal as possible in order to stay functional and don't break apart completely, for Madeleine, for the twins, for their own sake. I don't see anything wrong with how they behave. Honestly. I believe they only try to keep strong, and I admire them for that. I would probably just have a breakdown and be no use for anybody. And that's no good when you have two young children and want to keep looking for your missing daughter.
But I seem to be with a very small minority from what I read here and elsewhere ...
@ Martina I disagree that others are sympathetic to them, I pity them immensely but i cannot forget they caused this situation and what happens to missing children is far worse than a people saying they are guilty - sticks and stones and all that BUT what I will say is that I meant that if they allowed the public to see some emotion, some tears, some remorse, some sorrow, which they do not show then perhaps people would treat them with less contempt. Like you say you would probably breakdown, as would I, I do not want to see that happen to Kate I just mean humanise yourself!!!
@ Stanley what did you make of Kate she seemed to actually take over the interview at times and show some passion
Martina, I value your opinion but believe me it's far rougher in other forums on the suspects in this case. The only reason I choose to be here is because it is fair and balanced. G & K have had a balanced hearing here... but you must admit they've done themselves no favours in presentation as distraught parents. The onus is not on us we're merely interested onlookers. But even to this very fair multi-national forum there are and remain to be inconsistencies - things just don't add up and there is no way of not implicating the parents in that at the very least. There is no witch hunt here... just searching for the truth.
Liz
Lynn: Strange as it may seem I did not find that surprising. I know many on the thread think Gerry is a control freak. Personally I think the guy is a wimp. I believe it is Kate that is in control. Note that the waiter at the restaurant says that was the first time she had checked the children (in common with all the other women in the party) at 10 when M went missing. To me this shows that Gerry was not up to the job of announcing the "abduction". Kate realising what a weak character he was knew he might under pressure muff the lines and say something really silly like "They have taken Madeleine" and that would have sounded really false!
Here-Here Liz! I just finished watching it a couple times, I must say Kate came off amazingly well, compassionate, caring and dare I say credible? Gerry on the other hand seemed more relaxed then usual, but...puke! I was shocked that they had the nerve to say they haven't said anything in the media for a long time; that they have been quiet. Literally that may be true, but we all know the difference.
Do you know what, I'm tired of my mini obsession with this case... I have a valuable life to lead outside of it.
I truly beleive that we will be no closer to knowing factual events of the evening of May 3rd in many weeks hence than we are now and I'm sick of repeating comments I made ages ago and still we're no closer to the truth. In additon I don't like analysing everything that's said and done via press, not in these days of none ratification.
So for now I'm bowing out to get on with my life.
I have really enjoyed all your comments and dry humour but most of all your dignity.
I'll be back along no doubt if/when things get a little hotter, take care, live well and prosper.
Love & Peace, Liz
P.S. Steve thanks a lot, you're a wizard of the plastic keys.
Take Care Liz, your thoughts interested me and I hope in time we all get what we so desperately want, the resolution to this sad and tragic event. God Bless, Lynn x
Martina,
I agree with you re: the McCanns. I am one of the few who find them "sympatico" and I feel sorry for them.
I just don't know how they hold up under this kind of constant criticism and suspicion. Even on this Forum, people LOVE to hate the McCanns. It does not matter what they say or do...everything gets twisted around so that they are put in the worst possible light with ulterior motives.
What if they are innocent? I can't condemn them until we have proof of their involvement.
Even if it turns out that they tried to hide an accident,I think I will still have some compassion for them. I am sure they did not want their daughter to die and are suffering more than any of us will ever know.
I think I am suffering of McCann's fatigue. I probably need a break from this Forum.
K.
Hey Katrina, I remember you said you were from Calif. glad you must be in a safe spot with power (I was concerned for you)!
Liz I understand, I have a huge project coming up, everyone knows my views, however will be reading all your wonderful posts & scanning the news as usual, just not so intent (I hope, I am obsessed as well)!
Thanks, Dee.
I am in Northern California and the fires are in Southern Cal, near San Diego. It's still hard to watch the evacuation and over 1000 homes have been destroyed. Just awful.
I just caught the tv interview after working late. And once more I see the responses here are mainly to do with how people feel, rather than anything else.
I don't think there was anything in the interview which enlightened us much.
So here is what I feel, since I know nothing more than I did at the beginning if the interview.
The McCanns seem to still be themselves. Gerry is still inarticulate, surprisingly so for an educated man doing a planned interview with agreed questions, and Kate just managed to do a little tearfulness for the cameras. :-|
If you are asking me do I like these people (the McCanns), the answer on the basis of what little I have seen of them is - no, not really. They appear to be incapable of expressing themselves in any kind of natural language, they seem distant, awkward, strange, you name it... However, that's not why I am interested in the case.
Like all of you here, I am fascinated by the whole Kate and Gerry media circus. But the main thing that keeps me checking this discussion and putting in my 2 cents is the intriguing mystery of what happened to Madeleine.
Like any reasonable person, I would be very happy to see the wee girl found safe and well. But like most of you, I just don't think that's going to happen.
I don't wish any harm on Kate and Gerry McCann, no matter what the outcome is. I think abduction and wandering off are still possible explanations. But I am suspicious of them. The thing I find most relevant in these appearances they make is just how guarded they appear to be. My impression from this is that they know something that they are not saying. The more they appear guarded, the more I feel there is something they know.
If it's a media offensive to try and persuade people who have not prejudged them - that includes me! - it's a media disaster. Clarence! I honestly don't think getting Kate to try and cry on telly is really going to endear her much. It's kind of too late, and she just can't do it anyway.
And here is what I still think. I am suspicious of the McCanns not because of their body language or their looks or their inarticulacy or Clarence or any of that.
It's because the story they are telling doesn't stack up. Something's wrong with the reality! Not the appearance. They could come across like Earth Mother and Decent Bloke, or Broken Hearted Mum and Distraught Dad, or anyone human rather than McCann-bots...
and still I would think: there's something not quite right about this story.
What was that about the kids being left alone? About you going to dinner and drinking with your friends? Every night? Did you really think that was ok? Did you really mean it when you said still felt you were responsible parents? Why do you think the cops think you might have been involved in the disappearance? Do you not think that's a reasonable hypothesis, in the circumstances? What about the story of the shutter being open? About the door being locked? A
bout the Cuddle Cat being found on a ledge? What? You washed the Cuddle Cat? Why? Didn't you think it might be evidence? Didn't you want to smell your daughter off it, even a tiny wee bit? What about the times you say you checked the kids? What about the conflicting stories of your friends? Why did your friend think it was ok to leave his daughter who had been vomiting? Or did he? And surely when you found her gone, you should have picked the twins up and taken them out of the room their sister was just abducted from - why did you leave them there instead? What?
And that's just the beginning.
There's something up here, says a reasonable man.
It's based on what happened on May 3, and what scant facts we have been able to determine since then. And it's not based on how the McCanns appear on tv.
I remain shocked at how many people (including a few on this board) still feel compassion toward K & G. Compassion toward M - undoubtedly. But towards K & G? Absolutely not. These are two people who behaved so utterly negligent vis- a-vis their children that I'm simply astounded that anyone could still feel sorry for them. And evidence? There is plenty. How would you McCann supporters explain the sniffer dogs going crazy around the rental car, detecting the scent of a corpse, which was rented some three weeks after the disappearance of M? And what about the lies about the crime scene i.e. the shutters, the unlocked door, the checks on the children every 20 minutes, etc. And who goes on vacation with their children only to dump them into day care daily and leaves them alone and unsupervised in their room at night in order to party on with friends? It's disgusting to me. Why did K & G refuse to answer those 40 questions in Portugal? Why didn't the families of K & G immediately fly to Portugal to be by K & G's side and offer assistance if they were so innocent?
I'm convinced that the McCann supporters remain loyal to Team McCann simply because they could afford a highly expensive PR spin in their favour. The fact that both are wealthy doctors doesn't hurt. And I'd bet that if M's Mom had been an unmarried young woman on vacation with her boyfriend, people would be reacting much differently to this whole sordid tale.
@ reasonable man I agree with you and that is why people are so suspicious of the McCanns, they really just come across as robots and seem emotionless. I actually have a friend who worked with Gerry, a down to earth relaxed man was how he was described, a far cry from the man we see now.
@Billie Firstly I think your comments are unfair, innocent until proven guilty, and at the moment we just have a jumble of facts, fiction and witness statements. Witness statements, which in some cases are unreliable. Having worked in bars as a student how any waiter can give such precise timings is beyond me, you just do not pay that much attention, others to serve, drinks to pour etc etc or was he keeping a diary???? I take his account with a pinch of salt.
Secondly, this is a discussion forum, putting points across, I believe the McCanns are innocent, yet I have worked through other theories, listened to others and not made any decisions as to their guilt apart from to say:
1. they are guilty of neglect - you should never leave children alone
2. they are guilty of being robotic in public, in privat we will never know how they act
3. they have so much publicity around them spin of the facts is bound to happen again the press are guilty of this not the McCanns, although they orchestrated the coverage - rightly so
4. their stories of the night in question don't add up, this isnt a necessity for guilt, in most situations we will not all give the correct facts but our facts, the memory is a funny thing.
5. They are unable to admit they shouldn't have been out, they don't show in "public" that they realise they are to blame, that I think is the cause of the publics witch-hunt.
Overall, yes things don't add up, their refusal to answer questions, the conflicting stories, the fact they are aguido's all do not look good.
So far however, they are only guilty of one thing and that they and Madeleine are paying the price for.
I detest them for what they have caused to happen to Madeleine, how can I not, knowing there is a possibility Madeleine may have been raped, beaten, tortured or killed - this happens, a sad and disgusting fact of life these days. However, nothing we can say or do will ever make them feel worse, I am not into vindication, I do know people feel they should be charged with neglect, this will probably lessen their guilt but won't make a terrible situation better. As a mother, if they are innocent, as for now is the presumption until I have concrete fcts to state otherwise, then I whole-heartedly pity them for they have lost a daughter and that is something I wish on no-one, regardless of why it happened.
There is obviously a great deal of fatigue set in over this case. I feel much the same myself - in fact I have quit previous threads twice in an attempt to uninvolved and return to the rest of my life. The problem is of course that the amonunt of mental and emotional energy we expend thinking about Madeleine an dher parents is very draining because the whole thing goes round and round in circles. People are still discussing the same things as months ago with no real result or conclusion.
Obviously the media want to keep this running because it sells newspapers and also the McCanns own media strategy is geared to keep the story going and also to counter any negative thoughts we migth have about them as people.
As regards compassion ( and I know this may be contraversial) I would still have compassion for K@G even if they are covering up an accident. I have compassion even though they seem to have made a mistake leaving their young children. Where my compassion lessens is when I see deliberate concealing of the truth, failure to answer simple questions and refusal to help the police who are charged by society (Portuguese and British) to solve the crime. In doing this they are making the whole thing about them - whether they will escape a trial and prison - and not about Madeleine. So at the end of the day I don't really care whether Kate cries on TV or not and I refuse to analyse her body langage becasue I am not interested in them at all.
Hi Lynn, I am glad to hear you agree with me - except I don't think that's what I said!
It's not because they "come across as robots" (although they surely do) that causes me to be suspicious: precisely the opposite. Anyone who has worked in the media, including me, must know that the way you can appear to be in front of a camera may bear little relation to the way you behave off screen. So I am stating that I don't much care for the people McCanns as they appear to be on tv; and I am consciously discounting that appearance and feeling of antipathy, since it may be based on the illusion of tv.
But...
It's their story which doesn't stack up - not their image.
"In doing this they are making the whole thing about them - whether they will escape a trial and prison - and not about Madeleine."
I don't neccessarily agree with this view. They have to stay out of prison to be able to keep looking for Madeleine and for the twins. These are I think their main objectives.
Karina put it nicely
"It does not matter what they say or do...everything gets twisted around so that they are put in the worst possible light with ulterior motives."
That's how I see it as well. They can do whatever they want now, there will always be people who will put it in a bad light. Example: first it was criticized that Kate didn't cry in public. Now she cried and now THAT is being criticized. *roll eyes*
Again quoting Karina: "People love to hate the McCanns." Most of the assessments and judgements here and on other boards tell more about the writer than about G+K. People shout "SPIN" whenever something turns up in the media. Spin also happens on the boards, including this one. It's a shame imho.
I have not made up my mind re their involvement in the disappearance of the little girl. But I distance myself from judgeing people because of their facial expressions or lack of tears or jogging etc. That's just cheap imo.
Martina: this thread is defintely not a vitriolic anti-McCann fest. It's on the true crime blog. We're (mainly) trying to work out what happened to the little girl - in the absence of much help from the statements and actions of her own parents, to be frank.
And there's a difference between judging people because of "facial expressions or lack of tears or jogging" (as I don't) and finding that someone's story doesn't add up (as I do).
@ A reasonable Man - sorry I meant I agree with you about the lack of evidence, confusion in the statements etc, it doesn't add up, that is what I was referring to, was multi-tasking at the time and I think my writing was a little confusing, sorry about that.
I too have worked in TV and know the "misrepresentation" that in-front of camera can give. This whole thing causes me concerns and I do pity the McCanns but I do firmly think they do nothing to help themselves, everytime I go to say poor them, Gerry says something that makes me think Oh FFS.
After the interview on Monday night it was reported he said to a crying Kate "don't say anything until the microphones have been taken off" This is reported on Sky news whether it is reliable I do not know but it makes me again think why the hell would he say that??????????
My tag line is going to be "Stop talking Gerry"
Lynn - he might just be conscious that everything they say is examined minutely by us on the internet - so any stray remark would be seized on and analysed.
Lynn, I simply find it difficult to feel compassion for K&G - not because they lost their daughter - but because:
1) they have not been completely cooperative with police
2) their inital abduction story (the shutters) has been inconsistant
3) they have hired a Portuguese PR firm to help boost their image in that country
I have great difficulty in their refusal or reluctance to be totally forthcoming with the investigation. And the longer they refuse to cooperate fully and answer every and all questions posed to them, the longer this case will remain unsolved.
The PR campaign and media interviews seem to me to be deflecting attention away from the real task at hand which is finding M.
I have to agree with John who put it so eloquently when he wrote: "In doing this they are making the whole thing about them - whether they will escape a trial and prison - and not about Madeleine". And that's the saddest truth of all.
Resonable Man - I didn't mean you. You are quite reasonable!
Well said Billy!
This is someone's translation of 24 horas:
At the end of the interview the McCann gave to Spanish channel Antena 3, Gerry whispered to Kate: "Don't say anything while the microphones aren't taken away from us". Still, the whispered warning was broadcast. Roberto Arce, the journalist who interviewed the couple, told 24horas about this and other episodes, without hiding the surprise he had with the machine surrounding the McCann.
Robert Arce arrived in Manchester on Tuesday to interview the couple. "I was very surprised by the assessoring they have, the electoral campaign-like machine, with people whispering them how they should act," he admitted.
“The McCann team told me before the interview: ‘We want Kate to open her heart a little to the Spanish people'." But Roberto guarantees that the Kate’s suffering, which we witnessed personally, is not fabricated.
“During the interview, she cried. In the end, she even cried more. The Kate I saw is a tormented woman, physically shaken, very sad and moved. I wasn’t expecting it,” he admitted.
I would be interested in Stanley's view on the name Roberto Arce - not sure how its pronounced of course.
Re John Are you sure this is a translation from the 24Horas? In their edition online, there is indeed the interview but not the comment concerning what Gerry whispered to Kate. I heared Gerry whispering it in the video in antena3.
Jose I got it from here:
http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewt...pic.php?
t=23435
there has been many post regarding the transferral of Madeleine to the UK, each one commenting on the unlikely hood due to security measures at the Airports, especially now.
ok so what about the Ferries... there is a ferry from Bilbao to plymouth, does anyone know if any of the party drove back to the uk?
from PDL to Bilbao takes is an 11hr drive... unlikely.. maybe... but a possible theory and maybe more feasible than through an Airport.
No baggage checks on a ferry route.
John said "I would be interested in Stanley's view on the name Roberto Arce - not sure how its pronounced of course"
Sorry mate I have got the Roberto O.K. but I am damned if I can get to the bottom of his last name.
Re John Thank you. It s in fact the printed page 6 of the 24 Horas of today, in their website in this page there is an article about G. Bush.
I have seen the interview 2 times. I was not impressed. Whoever calls that weeping uncontrollably does not know anything about weeping.
It seems all arranged ... the fact that now it is KM who speaks more than
GM who comes out, at least for me, as a fake.
IMO this interview was a faillure and did them more harm than good.
It impressed me very badly the answer to the last two questions. She does not comment and he "blalalblas" about it it.
KM seems to be out of reality believing her child is unharmed in a home. But if it is true that she believes it, than why not plead to the people who took Maddy to return her???
I think it was all a show to delete on us the bad impressions left by her parents' interview. It did not succed (spell) at least for me. They at least showed sincere sadness and said some very compromising things for the McCann.
Why do not they shut up?
Have you read Pat Brown's letter for the McCann? I agree completely with her.
http://patbrownprofiling.blogspo...f-day-
open.html
And it shocked me immensly that GM answered to the last question, if they had any regrets about their actions, that they did not have any regrets after her daughter went missing. If I understood well.
Just for that he deserves to go to jail. If he was honest he should have make a plea to all parents to never leave their children alone and go booze and have fun.
Marilia - thanks for the Pat Brown link what she says is interesting - although I was not impressed by her suggestion that they use the fund to employ her! anyway ... one thing that occured to me which she didn't really say is that the McCanns don't and never have reflect any anger against the perpertrator. If they believed that she has been taken by child traffickers or a pedophile then surely they would be seething with rage and hatred. Is this some kind of self control to stop the person enjoying their suffering, some kind of religious forgiveness thing or what? Kate said something about 'knowing' that she was in someone's house (in fact they both mentioned her being in a house) and that no one could hurt her because she was beautiful. Is this denial or just a kind of fantasy? If she has been abducted then she is likely (at least) a scared prisoner of unpleasant people. Maybe they just can't let themselves think about that.
It would not be surprising if they are both in some kind of psychological meltdown - no matter what the truth is about Madeleine.
Yes John it is puzzling. If they really think she is well in a home they would appeal to the hesrt of the people who tooke her to give her back. And yes if they think so they are in denial.
If they admit she was taken by a paedophile than their suffering would not allow them to maintain the control they are showing.
IMO they are lying, they come across to me as people who are hiding something, who feel guilty and try to the blame somewhere else. They can not even admit they are guilt of neglect. They come across as people who are trying to save their miserable persons.
My gutter feelings towards them surprise me. I am normally a soft person. I can not help my disgust of them. I do not feel good about it. I would prefer to feel that they did not do it, because if they did my faith in human race will be very shaken. That is why I understand the people who believe in them, albeit all the information we dispose of is against them.
http://tinyurl.com/2no84c
First drawing of "abductor" as per Jane Tanner's description.
The article says the interviews with the McCanns and their friends had NOT been recorded by the PJ. That's unbelievable!
"The detailed drawing was released as it emerged that Portuguese police did not record any of the interviews they carried out with Kate and Gerry McCann or their friends."
...reasonable man ...I like all your questions and would also like to ask ...how do you get 3 children asleep by 8pm every nite without sedating them ???
and who was doing the sedating -
I also would like to know who K meant when she said THEY, as in they have taken her ??
Marilia yes this is the one point I think we all agree on. That is the lack of remorse for what we KNOW they did do wrong. The abandonment of their parental duty on the night of 3rd May. Pat Brown in the excellent article you posted told the McCanns and their P.R.'s to shut up.
The problem is their P.R. (the famous Clarence) worked for our government. Tony Blair made a habit of apologising. He apologised for slavery, he wasn't born when it finished. He apologised for the Irish Potato Famine. It was finished before he was born. He did not apologise for the war in Iraq, he did not apologise for closing my local post office, because he was actually guilty of these things. This is one of the first rules of spin, look how humble I am admitting the blame for something you all know I did not do. The only thing K has apologised for is being underweight and I am glad that Pat Brown who is a professional profiler also finds the McCanns behaviour bizarre. I am sad to see some people leaving the site but can fully understand their reasons. Am I alone in thinking this is maybe what G&K are hoping, that we will all get so sick of it that even the news broadcasters will no longer bother and it will all just wither away. If so they should heed Pat Brown's advice and shut up.
from reading the posts I can see that I miss out on a lot of info as I no longer hear well enuf to listen to interviews and videos - my little world consists of cc..tv and reading posts - yes all at the same time - keeps my brain working tho -
One thing to keep in the back of your mind is if they actually come and say "in reality and most probably she is dead", the funding ends doesn't it? Who would donate if, even the parents think she is dead?
Karina
normally the PJ writes down everything you say and you have to sign each statement if you agree with it.
In the end of the interview GM says to KM "don't say anything else till they switch the microphones off"
What a odd thing to say
http://tinyurl.com/2o9gsq
Edited By Siteowner
& G & K had a lawyer, so I am sure everything was done carefully.
so 6 nearly 7 months on and Jane Tanner's abductors profile now looks like this .....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/70.../uk/
7062924.stm
and wasn't the child she saw being carried by this individual supposed to be wrapped in a blanket?
With regards to the PJ statement,it seems very unlikely that a record was not taken, in such a serious case, I do not think they would do that. It seems to be that even on here we have fell foul of the "McCanns Personality" infatuation rather than where is Madeleine concern. We seem to be getting back on track now.
Everyone knows my opinion on the McCanns so I shall not dwell on it.
I would like to look at the reasons why there is "strong evidence" that Madeleine is in Spain. It is frustrating that we cannot know the reasons why they feel this, my guess is because of the fact there is no border patrol and is easy to travel there.
Marilla - I heard that comment differently " Do you want to say anything to ......" - some are suggesting the end of the scentence was "to whoever has her".
The picture and the previous statements show more inconsistency - how is it going to be ever possible to solve this case if no one tells the damn truth.
Maybe we should take all the inconsistencies and work through them, I mean if there was a blanket but it isnt drawn in then either 1. there was no blanket but it would be something if was "making presumptions" i would say as who would take a child out at night in their pjs without one or 2. there never was a blanket and she suddenly "remembered" that like Kate "remembered" the shutters werent down.
RE: what Kate apparently was told about not saying anything else, already two conflicting statements, interpretations can make someone look so guilty.
Any one know when or if the DNA reports have been released yet?>
Tech note again... Sorry Steve.
Looks like the long url posted by Marilia above has broken the formatting again.
Maybe you would be so good as to fix as previously.
This glitch appears to happen in IE6 and Firefox 1.x browsers.
I sometimes use FF1.x for technical reasons, which is why I notice.
Stanley: if it is causing you difficulty,
the solution for you would be to upgrade to Firefox v2.
It doesn't seem to have this problem.
IE7 may well work ok also, I'm not sure.
Can people post short urls?
You can go to tinyurl.com/ to convert long ones to short ones.
Newsnight on BBC2 now discussing dna testing and Madeleine
if you cut and past the link you can hear what GM said. It was "dont say anything else....and you can hear what the interviewer commented on that.
macushla: Indeed, that's also what I remember from the earlier articles in the press.
I agree with Pat Brown's impressions; their behaviour is bizarre and (here I also agree with reasonable man) their story does not add up.
I remember how the parents of Julie and Melissa, Ann and Eefje reacted when their children disapeared, and there is a world of difference. Melissa's mother always blamed herself for having allowed two 8-year olds to go for a walk on their own. But she and her husband never had the narcissist attitude Pat Brown desrcibes so well in her open letter. You could see that these people were devastated, and they kept appealing to possible abductors for the release of their children.
Although Melissa's mother could be said to have some responsibility for the abduction, there was never the kind of general disapproval or hatred for the parents like we are seeing with the McCanns now.
This does not necessarily mean they (G&K) are guilty, it just shows that they have lousy PR agents. But the very fact they feel the need to resort to spin doctors does raise questions.
macushla - Thanks for the link...wow what a change & no blanket, hhmmm did the press screw up or did someone realize; how would you see pajamas under a blanket? What abductor has ever brought their very own blanket; I bet only this "tidy" one. By the picture this child was passed out. So now Mr. Eggman has a body side too, why was the front-on face even done??? Very interesting!
Some people think he said "do you want to say anything to whoevers got her" ... I can't tell although I've tried listening a few times. Anyway what does it matter?
So, if Jane Tanner is making up this story about the man with the child, this would mean that she is part of the cover up, along with her partner O'Brien, right?
K.
In the past I have kept a very open mind on J.T., but to see that great, discriptive sketch after all this time? R.O'B I have had serious doubts about, in regards to a possible accident theory.
What do you mean, Dee? that it was NOT an accident? Please clarify.
Thanks for asking me to clarify, all I meant was in the event any of the Tapas were involved in way, it would have to be an accident in my view. I am not 100% sure they or some of them are guilty but I lean 85-90% sure based on the supposed forensics they have promised. I can't believe supposed educated people could be so stupid to everything in the book to make themselves look guilty. My best friend disagrees, she calls them "over-educated dummys" and she is very suspicious of R.O'B.
I am obsessed, but I only read one article or three articles today and didn't look at the forum...but I did check in here a few times. I am working on it (LOL) I am sure all of you can relate.
Hi Dee,
I can relate for sure. I was going to take a break but here I am again, reading all the posts
I always thought that if the McCanns were involved, they'd need some help and OBrien sure would be a good candidate in my mind. Now I am thinking Jane Tanner by association with OBRien and the fact that she is the only person to have seen the man with the child, might well be involved too.
Where does it stop?
I hope we get those damn DNA results soon.
K.
One thing I have noticed on this board since I have been here is the huge difference from what the men think of events vs. the women. It is my personal opinion the men are noticing/realizing what every woman/mother has been saying, but also they have taught us a few things as well, "like concentrate on facts". I see a blending now between both view points that I think is very interesting and just humanized somehow. I like this board and appreciate everyones views.
Nancy Grace is talking about the McCanns now.
Maybe I should have called myself a reasonable person!
Quick notes on N. Grace:
Had Ant. 3 person on the line. After the interview, when Gerry says the famous line; Kate is upset and hunched over, Gerry half-heartedly puts his arm around her (indicted for a second), then walks off. Kate sits there for a few moments. Camera man says he "did see a tear shed". Nancy wondered why Kate would spend such valuable air time basically defending themselves. A pysc. said she still has problems Kate doesn't speak to the camera, but admitted she did better on this interview. A reporter from I believe the Daily Mail said "the drug testing on Maddy's hair is NOT back yet from the FSS. The DNA from Murat is minuite (spelling). They showed the new sketch. Re question why take not take the twins; the lawyer said throwing up his hands "it's a mystery". Nancy said, something to the effect "watch or don't listen to the PJ." Karina/Billy hope you get to watch & have a better follow-up.
Maybe I should have called myself a reasonable person! Good one!!! Just noticing how before we were divided and how much we (all), I don't know if taught is the right word, maybe listened to each other with an open mind and we have all learned something from each other is my point. I have noticed anyway.
Another article on sketch:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle2741672.ece
"It shows a white man carrying a girl wearing pink-and-white pyjamas similar to those worn by Madeleine on the night she disappeared, wrapped in what APPEARS to be a child’s pink blanket.
Kate and Gerry McCann, from Rothley, Leicestershire, commissioned the picture from a British artist because they are convinced that this is the man who abducted Madeleine and that he may still be holding her alive.
Portuguese police had refused to release details of Ms Tanner’s claims for more than three weeks and only made a public appeal after the McCanns threatened legal action. A senior police source said that they had not released the description because Ms Tanner’s evidence had changed over time and they feared it could hinder their inquiry. A previous police impression of another suspect was described as “an egg with hair”.
The new picture is far more detailed and clearly bears no resemblance to Robert Murat, a British man who was made an official suspect ten days after Madeleine’s abduction.
Mr McCann will return to work NEXT week as a consultant cardiologist at Glenfield Hospital in Leicester. He wants to bring some normality back to family life for the sake of his two-year-old twins, Sean and Amelie."
Did I read that right NEXT WEEK? Read that last line too...hello?
Spin is not the answer
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
commen...2199439,00.html
Very interesting article. this domination of the front pages has happened because the McCanns have encouraged it and their financial backers have funded it. The reason the nine-day/11-day rule has not applied is that Campbell and Carville were working on a model in which the subject of the journalism wants the coverage to stop, and therefore adopts tactics - of silence or diversion - which encourage reporters to look elsewhere. If the events in Portugal were to have a clear ending of any kind, Madeleine's parents would share the usual human desire to halt media interest but, for the moment, their desperate desire to keep the public looking for their daughter has led them to court publicity.
It was presumably for this reason that the McCanns became the first doctors to have a spin doctor. Previous civilians who have attracted public interest, usually through sex with a celebrity, have had Max Clifford speaking on their behalf, but his role is not usually spokesman but broker, placing their revelations in a single paper for a slice of cash. Clarence Mitchell, in contrast, briefs universally for free in the style established by the White House and followed by Downing Street.
It's easy to see how the McCanns fell into the trap of getting a press spokesman. Though firmly protesting their innocence of the insinuations by Portuguese press and police, those suggestions of guilt have caused them to believe that they need their own counter-voice.
The problem with this approach is that the traditional purpose of spin doctors is to convince people that a leader hasn't quite done what he probably did. The more often the press guy comes to the podium, the closer his boss's career is to being over.
Another difficulty is that Mitchell is usually commenting on events of which he has no firsthand knowledge, so his briefings tend to elide fact with assertion. And his habit of answering one question but then deflecting the next on the grounds that a response would break Portuguese judicial rules may be legally necessary but transmits a sense of slipperiness.
The biggest drawback, though, is that the McCanns have turned to spin and media manipulation at the precise moment these arts are most discredited in politics. What they say in an attempt to keep their child's face in people's minds has the effect of turning a daily spotlight on them. Anecdote and phone-ins suggest these appearances increase the resentment and suspicion they are aiming to defuse. Their tragedy is becoming a public relations disaster.
What have we all been saying?
Now what the hell is this all about...just when you think you have heard it all:
http://www.anorak.co.uk/twitteri...ngs/
177171.html
The Moroccan authorities expelled a British citizen, a few days ago, after he contacted staff from a gas station near the city of Marrakesh. A source from “Sureté Nacionale”, Moroccan security and intelligence services confirmed that the British citizen offered a large amount of money to several employees, in exchange for specific statements about a sighting concerning a blonde girl. British embassy in Morocco, contacted by SOS Madeleine, refused to comment. The possibility of having private detectives working in their country was referred, by the same source, as “an offence and a violation of national sovereignty”.
A source from PJ also told SOS Madeleine that “any person who undertakes a private investigation about a crime, in Portugal, is committing a crime - perverting the course of Justice – and will be arrested.” The McCann hired a private Spanish company, Metodo 3, to set up a hotline for people having information about Madeleine.
The hotline number has replaced the police phone numbers in the official page of FindMadeleine campaign. But according to Spanish Law and the specific regulations concerning private detective’s activity, any information received concerning a crime must be immediately forwarded to police.
Correio da Manhă 10/26/2007
Kate cries like a poker player
“The key of the mystery is surely hold by Kate, a very special women with disorders”, guarantees to the CM José Cabrera Forera, forensic psychiatric who has been following the case since the beginning. The Spanish has been listening attentively to “the staged interview” given by the couple to Antena 3 which objective was “to have the Spanish people on their side”. But 70% of the callers to the Spanish channel believes that the McCann were lying and the psychiatrist agreed with them “in crying without moving a single muscle Kate was more looking like a poker player”.
Expert in facial expression recognition, Cabrera says that “the face of Kate is still the same, except for the tears - the first ones after 5 months and curiously only after having been criticized for not having crying”, assures the Spanish psychiatrist, and “leading us to the certainty that she is hiding something”.
Cabrera says that the 30 minutes conversation was “not a spontaneous interview, it has been perfectly ordered in relation with the questions done by the journalists. And give us the impression that the entire attitude has been staged by the couple.”
The Spanish quotes the last sentences of Gerry and considered it “brilliant: “Don’t speak until they remove the microphone”. This proves that finally all that happen was a piece of theater; the entire interview has been staged. That was (perfectly) clear”.
José Cabrera noticed that during the “half an hour interview the only thing which has preoccupied him was to control her. It’s extraordinary. Every time she opens the month to speak, he takes her hand - and all that because the key of mystery is hold by her certainly, she is a very special women…”
Kate McCann “has psychiatric problems since a long time”, guarantees the expert, and “now it’s aggravating”. Cabrera reports from an interview done by the grandparents of Maddie to the Spanish television: “They, in their innocence, told inclusively that their daughter, Kate, had confessed before the disappearance that the child was with the time more and more looking with her and that from a psychiatric point of view says a lot…”
For the Spanish, it could be there the origin of the bad relationship between the mother and the daughter - in a reflex of relieved confession, Kate has written about Madeleine in her personal Diary- “it’s sufficiently relevant” for all the experts who have followed the case since the first days of May”.
The major preoccupation of Gerry was to “control the impulses of the woman in public - and it has been demonstrated one more time during this interview”, said José Cabrera Fornero. “It’s he who dominates the entire situation, he deals with everything and he knows that he has to control her and her problematic personality, to avoid her to go to far in front of the camera and talk too much…”
All the gestures and facial expressions “appear to be fatal for s
All the gestures and facial expressions “appear to be fatal for someone who has something to hide” - it’s what is saying all the experience accumulated along all the years by this forensic expert. “And as for that there is nothing more to add”.
José Cabrera has nothing “against this couple”, he doesn’t know them, but he has defended the culpability of the McCann in the TV show ‘Prós e Contras’ of the Portuguese television RTP, when the Polícia Judiciária confirmed their suspicions about the couple - and had reinforced yesterday its thesis to the CM, the day after Kate and Gerry had chosen Spain for their first television interview since they were constituted arguidos.
Even the English press confirmed that “70 per cent of the callers to a Spanish TV show said they thought the McCanns were not telling the truth” said on its online edition the ‘Daily Mail’.
José Cabrera wasn’t surprised: ‘Any English is cold, but she has something more - her personality is not normal. And he was mainly focused in her answers…”
So something has been bothering me since seeing the 'new artist's sketch' (commissioned by the McCanns)
Jane Tanner is a mother, she has a daughter of a similar age to Madeleine, so why if she saw this 'abductor' carring a child in this manner did she not become even slightly suspicious.
In earlier quotes she had said she thought it was just a father and sleeping child. Well as a mother of a 3 yr old, to carry a sleeping child like that (for me) is unnatural, I would carry my child upright with their head supported on my shoulder, as does my husband. Coupled with JT statement that the man was walking down the road ( towards Murats house), and was not in transit to an apartment seems an odd way to carry your own child.
And how, if she can remember height, weight, clothing and in which direction he was travelling, can she not be more specific about features. If all she saw was him in profile, then what about nose size, shape, if his hair was unkempt, 'greasy' then was he clean shaven or not.
If this senario did indeed play out then something must have peeked her interest in this man to be able to describe so 'accurately' what he was wearing.
I watched the skynews interview posted here...What is Kate talking about when she says 'She is there' and 'Madeleine is there', she says it more than once. Does she mean somewhere in Portugal? Why doesnt she say that? I didnt see her crying and didnt hear them mention a house so I guess I havent clicked the right link yet, but what the heck is she trying to say this time??
If in some interview they say Madeleine is in a house more than once, maybe they mean in God's house and tho that could mean heaven - if they were asked to explain - maybe it means the church in PDL...if even for a short time. I believe they have lost touch with reality, in that short interview Kate makes no sense really and Gerry uses 'ludicrous' again, it is obviously second nature to him to use this word, he must say it all the time. He hasnt moved any further on from the early days of defending his actions.
And where did that interview take place? Were they in Portugal, my impression tho I know objectively they were not, or just with Portuguese newspeople? Why would they do that? They seem now to be overly concerned with making a good impression to the Portuguese people - good luck, bit late for that.
And on that ludicrous drawing from Jane Tanner's now madly improved memory - once again, you cannot distinguish colors in the dark, especially pale ones, as in pale pink pajamas. We have already seen the place she saw this man, I didnt see any huge klieg lights there, tho we havent seen videos of the place at nite. But there are no poles that I saw to support klieg lights, sorry Jane. Suddenly she knows what he is wearing and he has really dark hair, perhaps like a Portague (I am one) or Spaniard, seriously racist of her.
The blanket is either missing or just over the child's chest. Why have the McCanns neglected to say 'Look her blanket is missing, the abductor wrapped her in it' to help themselves? Because they might have to account for that somehow and they cannot do so without a really Big Lie. They didnt say it at the outset, it would have really helped their abduction theory, and so they are hoping no one noticed that omission. The resort has never said 'Oh we are out one child's blanket' either. That story is total hogwash. Either Tanner and O'Brien are in on it from the start or are 'helping' but this too is backfiring.
I think they know what John and I agree on, which is that the Portuguese DO have some real evidence and are building a real case which they would lose if it comes to trial - and so they are courting the heart and minds of the Portuguese people.
Sympathy for the McCanns, from a reasonable man...
It has occurred to me more than once that, as Chanel says, the McCanns (either or both) may have lost touch with reality - in which case the public tragedy unfolding before us would be truly Shakespearian in its proportions. With the permanent caveat that we still do not know very much of what happened to Madeleine McCann on May 3 and afterwards, I think that most people suspect - with the police - that the parents were involved in some way (more than the already heavy burden of their failed responsibility to look after the children).
But many of the sceptics' comments about their "use" of the media are in my view wrong. It's the other way round: the media is using them.
Even if the McCanns genuinely did nothing wrong, more than fail to look after their kids properly that night, (the "McCanns are innocent" scenario) the media circus is clearly not doing them any favours. It seems that the more they appear with implausible stories and scenarios (even, tragically, if these were in fact true) the less inclined people are to believe them.
The huge media campaign which they started seems to me to have quickly got out of their control. Mark Lawson's article linked to above is quite correct. Clarence Mitchell and the spinning are making it all worse, rather than better. The spin just helps to sell more papers, boosts tv viewing figures and increases website traffic (not to mention crime blog hits!) but few people believe it.
Lawson concludes: "Their tragedy is becoming a public relations disaster."
But the public relations disaster which they are probably now incapable of stopping is only part of their tragedy.
If the "McCanns are innocent" scenario is correct, it is already a tragedy... to have lost a child and not to be believed could well cause people to lose touch with reality as Chanel suggests.
And if the "McCanns are innocent" scenario is not correct, the decision to cover up has led them to a lie of monumental proportions, which even without the loss of a child and the disbelief of the public, would cause any number of people to lose the plot.
At the point where the tragedy is irreversible, which may have been reached quite early in the case of Madeleine McCann, the reasoning of the distracted might be to carry on with the big lie. It reminds me of the insane resignation of Macbeth to see the play through:
"I am in blood
Stepped in so far that, should I wade no more
Returning were as tedious as go o'er"
- Macbeth III.iv
I take it all back! I have said in the past that I thought Jane Tanner and her partner Dr Russell O'Brian were suspicious characters and that the man seen by JT was a possible red herring. Mea Culpa! The incisive brain and remarkable memory of this woman has broken the case wide open, and even worse from my biased viewpoint proves the McCannns are on the right road with their new offensive in Spain.
I have made a positive I.D. on JT's drawing. It was simple really. The reason we are told there are no features on the drawing is that she could not remember them positively. So to put this out of my head and judge the rest of the artist's impression on merit, I took my best black crayon and drew a mask on his face. On second inspection it hit me like a thunderbolt. I was looking at a picture of Don Diego de la Vega! Known amongst the peasantry as Zorro. I know it for sure because Zorro wears trousers a jacket and shoes and has dark hair, bingo, how many other men on the Iberian continent could fit that bill? Good news is K&G do not have to put out wanted notices or rewards as the Spanish authorities have been looking for him for over 100 years now, everybody knows him, I think it must be the light coloured trousers are the giveaway.
Anyway now Ms Tanner's memory is so sharp could she please tell us:
1. How long was her partner Dr O'Brian absent from the table looking after their daughter?
2. How often were the children checked? Were they checked while O'Brian was up in the apartment? Unnecessary I would have thought.
3. How many bottles of wine did they drink?
4. Did any of them have a hire car that evening?
All very simple compared to inventing, sorry, sketching an abductor.
Re Stanley, Acording to the Portuguese newspaper SOL:
1. 25 to 30 minutes
2. The children were checked 5 times:
- 1st Matthew 21h Back at 21h35
- 2nd Gerry 21h05 Back at 21h25
- 3rd Jane 21h10 Back at ? Probably before 21h35!
- 4th Russel 21h30 Back at 21h55
- 5th Kate 22h00
3. Betweew 8 to 14
An excellent summary can be watched here if you missed it:
http://www.rte.ie/news/primetime/
Note: 22:39 minutes
States no DNA tests can tell if a person was alive or dead. Chanel gives a good picture of how dark the area is at night, incredibly dark in fact.
I didnt have a chance to post last night re:BBC2 and Madeleine DNA. It was very interesting and helpful and as doctors I wondered if the McCanns would have an "understanding" of this.
Anyway the jist of it is:
The DNA profiling used in the Madeleine case is that of LCA
_ Low Count Anaysis DNA. In laymens terms it simply means the DNA is broken down to its smallest state and then it is regenerated to form a profile. In doing this the result is flexible as tom dick and harry may be suspects and tom did it but they may have simliar dna so could all be guilty. It isnt conclusive like DNA is. Sooooooo this means they wont get a definite answer, the problem being that Madeleines dna could be similar to many other peoples so the argument is they cannot prove the dna belongs to Madeleine.
Sorry if explanation seems confusing, I hope I made some sense.
Dee | 10.26.07 - 9:40 am - thanks for that link. Why does it take an Irish TV prog. to actually present the case rather than a lot of one sided spin. I would say Clarence Mitchalls performance typifies the spin approach - all suggestion and innuendo - I can't talk directly about this but ... and so on. Clearly learned from working ina political environment where this is usual practice but an insult when dealing with a real event like a missing child.
Dee thank you for the RTE posting that is the best programme I have seen. Just 2 points. I loved the way that Clarence assured us that all we Brits can't wait to get rid of our children at night "it's our culture"???? I suppose he packs his off to boarding school! Also that is the first picture I have seen of Jane Tanner and I know that we agree on this thread to discount physical appearances. therefor all I will say is I hope RTE put out the programme after the watershed, as there might be some Irish bairns not sleeping tonight.
Glad you guys liked it. Just finished watching what Lynn watched on the DNA testing if you want to watch this (about 15 min.) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/help/...elp/
3681938.stm
If you want to puke, watch the next video on C.M. describing the drawing, accuracy and while it is so late coming, etc.
Stanley | 10.26.07 - 11:56 am - there are pics of everyone involved and a few who are doubtless not involved on this thread:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums...ead.php?
t=53137
I agree that the RTE programme is the best - but it poses the question why the BBC etc can't manage to do the same - have they been got at?
Re John there are pics of everyone involved and a few who are doubtless not involved on this thread:
Do you have seen a picture of David Payne?
Jose (FR) | 10.26.07 - 12:54 pm - page two of link to websleuths posting no. 35 - pics of all Tapas 9, not a greta pic though.
Re John Thank you. I think it s the only picture of him available.
Why are there so few photos of the TApa7?
You'd think reporters would be interested in taking their pictures. They are running out of things to print
I watched the Spanish TV interview last night. Someone on this Forum said it was staged. How could it possibly be staged when the McCanns did such a terrible job? Someone should have told them what to say and how to say it. Even "I" who wants to believe in their innocence was dismayed by their words.
I think Kate is falling apart mentally. It's a matter of time before she has a break-down.
K.
Thanks for rte link I have to say some of the "early" footage of Kate and Gerry made me think K was deavastated and her voice was so shaky and uncontrolled, like a mother, almost.
"It also emerged yesterday that Portuguese police failed to record any of their interviews with the McCanns, their friends or any of the witnesses to Madeleine's disappearance.
Instead, detectives relied on handwritten notes, which they translated from English to Portuguese contemporaneously."
Is this really true? Were the 11 hrs of interrogation of Kate McCann NOT videotaped???
Source: Correio da Manhă:
THE INTERVIEW HAS BEEN A CIRCUS SHOW:
Moita Flores, Portuguese criminologist, ex PJ Detective, considers that the interview has been one more time staged by the McCanns.
Correio da Manhă- What opinion do you have concerning the performance of the McCanns in the interview done for the Spanish television?
Moita Flores - All that appears to me to be a circus show, in which the couple repeated the common locations of use: succeeding one more time to escape to the essential. And one more time they revealed to have a lot to tell, but unfortunately they are not willing to do so…
- In this interview to the Antena 3 Kate appears to be more emotive that she was usually.
- But the more curious is that before the interview had happened it was already known that she would cry and it happen exactly as it was said. And finally she results to have a good performance…
- Do you believe that it was a staging of image in all the interview?
- Note also that it was also known that the couple would take the opportunity to praise the Portuguese police, that it happened exactly as it was said..
- Gerry appeared to be confident about the DNA tests which would not incriminate them.
- When he spoke about the tests, it was a foolish answer to a docile compleasant journalist. Everybody knows that the DNA tests are used to identifify persons and don’t lie. Besides a test can't condemned anybody. It was miserable.
- How could this statements of the couple could be qualified?
- It was a staging in which no body believes. After the abduction theory, now they are insisting in their innocence. And someone who is innocent doesn’t need it
New Witness Comes Forward - Contr. J.T.
http://tinyurl.com/2guu9z
I don't know what SOS Madeleine is though...
Most, actually all interviews are staged to a point, they have to be. Questions about the subject topic are discussed and the running order is given beforehand, a final script is given so all concerned know what is going to happen. The only staging that may have been done in this interview might have been the question about sedation that the McCanns believed wasnt going to be asked. MY guess is that they knew and had agree beforehand it could be asked but would put out the "rumour" it was not supposed to be asked. Making the McCanns look "hurt" "bullied" making the interviewer look "radical".
Dee | 10.26.07 - 3:31 pm - that's intersteing an seems to put the final nail in the Jane Tanner story. What with Kate visibly in meltdown and JT hallucinating - I wonder if this thing is about to unravel?
Hey, didn't I say "they will hang themselves with their own words" on the previous thread...now if one of them will just crack! I think this girl(?) is a credible witness. She is standing around smoking a cigarette viligently looking around for Ma or Pa. And Jane what happened to the little girl's blond hair and the "abductor's" hair went from short to long? I suspect they now don't want him to look like Murat.
As Richard Littlejohn says "You couldn't make it up!" Six months after the event Jane Tanner sits down with a police artist and draws a man with no face. This is then hailed as a great breakthrough by team McCann. Clarence as I have already remarked has informed the world that all British people detest their offspring and can't wait to get rid of them at night. The Portuguese P.R. company arrange for Kate to cry in public for the first time on Spanish television. The smoking person (for all X files lovers or deep throat for Watergate fans) contradicts JT's sighting, although how someone not remembering seeing a man 6 months ago is news beats me. All I can say is I hope Branson or Kennedy or any of the other financiers of Team McCann are pleased with how their money was spent this week. The McCanns have gone from strange to weird to wacko. After the Spanish T.V. appearance the station took a poll and 70% of viewers said they did not believe what the McCanns said. They apparently said they wished to do tv in Spain first as they knew they would get a better reception there than in U.K. or U.S.A.. They were right, there is no way it would be as low as 70% in either of those countries.
Sir Walter Scott wrote:
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive!"
(Marmion. Canto vi. Stanza 17.)
I truly believe that it's the beginning of the end for Team McCann. Soon there will be no believers left.
May justice prevail.
Here is an appeal by Madeleine's mother to be "kind to Kate"
http://tinyurl.com/2sm5jt
I really wish this case would come to an end. I am sick of it.
Correction, K. You meant to say that the appeal was from M's grandmother, who is Kate's mother.
Interesting, that she should now come to the defence of her daughter. Where was she when M went missing? And why was she not supportive until now, six months after M went missing?
Oops..you're right, Billie. It's Kate's mom.
I've been following this case for only about 3 months but it's true that we did not hear much from her until recently.
And what happened to the very vocal sister of Gerry? Did someone tell her to keep quiet???
J.
I really wish this case would come to an end. I am sick of it.
Karina | 10.26.07 - 11:40 pm
Sad that people feel this way, the McCanns are causing it with their spin etc, yet the fact is poor Madeleine is what its supposed to be about.
OK I have finally seen the whole interview and I AM going to analyze some of the body language. But I shall also ask you all to sit as they are sitting and mimic them, esply the females mimic Kate, the males Gerry.
First she is clicking, her mouth is very dry, she is either totally scared, nervous, or she has recently started on an anti-depressant drug as even a benzo doesnt do that.
She is gripping his hand, his arm really in her lap with her legs a bit apart while he covers his crotch the entire time with his hand. To me that speaks volumes. This is a marriage of sexual control. Passion is what binds them. That works both ways which is why Gerry is covering his crotch, his power. She is holding a wrecked balled up tissue the whole time - palms sweating? Ready to cry? Been crying? Or something other than Cuddle Cat to hold onto as a tool to channel all that nervous energy. And her feet are toed in! She mimics a frightened little girl!
But her words tell a whole different story. The bit about Madeleine is in someone's house, she has a feeling and doesnt know why - I think she means God's house. If she doesnt and she really believes no one will hurt Madeleine...ok Kate get a grip. If she Does Believe that no one would hurt Madeleine, then why? Because she is past the point of being hurt? At around minute 11 when the interviewer is asking her about her daughter, she hasnt much to say, she does not repeat She was a beautiful little person and give any example, such as she loved to laugh or play with the twins or Cuddle Cat or anything - emptiness.
Why oh why does she refuse to answer on the sedation? Is it really bc she thinks it rubbish or is it bc that might get her arrested for breaking the secrecy laws? And if it were you, wouldn't you proclaim your innocence at that moment and try to make it clear that it never happened, etc, your words, but Something? She hardly seems press savvy at this moment. She shoud be somewhat used to this after 6 months and should be able to clearly state her case without appearing as a little girl lost.
Would you sit that way for nearly 15 minutes after your little girl was gone and you are giving yet another interview or appearing yet again before the press? She hunches over, she makes weird faces. Try it. Feel it.
Gerry, he of icy control, says we have asked the press to be responsible in their reporting - really? When was that? On the sedation question, he says there is absolutely no suggestion that they did that. What planet is he on??
Would you sit like he does for 15 minutes? Try it. Feel it.
Kate said Nothing will be shown to make them seem guilty and There, there she is very confident. She believes that. Is that bc of all the help they are getting from people in high places? Or because Madeleine is in a house alright - God's house. And she knows it absolutely.
They know the truth - and they are undone by it.
I've been on holiday, with no internet (bliss). So in a week the following has happened
A new sketch by Tanner showing nothing but the frilly edges around the child's pj's therefore must be Maddie.
Parents believe she was taken by kindly man and is being well looked after - not in the least surprised by this remark following the Dispatches programme.
New interview with Spanish television - read a report that Kate was grief striken but scanning through these comments this doesn't appear to be the case
STILL no forensics back.......
Does this sum up the case so far?
Hi Maggie, that pretty much Does sum it all up, lol, sigh, sadly.
I meant to tell Stanley that his 'I take it all back' comment made me really laugh, that was priceless. And thanks to ARM for his agreement with me that they are truly losing it, all undone.
Gerry said that there was no suggestion of them sedating the children - then doesnt he contradict his own sister Philomena on that one? Does he think we will all forget, that the irresponsible media will forget? Losing his grip there.
And who on this earth if their child were missing would refuse to be on Oprah as the BBC has it? What?! Instead you would pick Spanish tv to appeal for more searching (supposedly what they did in the interview, tho I only heard Kate mention it at the very beginning and neither of them looked directly at the camera and made such an appeal or any other for that matter)?
No. You would go to Oprah bc she is shown in Spain and Portugal and parts of Africa and so many places!! But she just might ask even a softball question about the pesky sedatives or those damned 40 questions.
Chanel
I like your summary of the interview, which I too have watched. Kate always appears to me to be jumpy, frightened and fragile, which I have to say elicits sympathy from me for her, however having listened to her on the Radio 4 Womans Hour interview I did not get this impression. She seemed more stronger when going it alone. Gerry remains constant. Consistently irritating, especially when he covers his crouch with his hand, an action that as you suggest is one of control. However I see it directed to the interviewer. To me it says loud and clear - back off with intrusive questions - I'm the one in control here. This couple have been under intensive media scrutiny and the inconsistencies in their stories are beginning to show.
I too would like to see them being interviewed by Oprah.
I think Larry King would be better than Oprah.
Every parent of a missing child would be glad to be asked to go on the Larry King show. In fact, the most publicized missing children stories had the parents interviewed by L. King.
And I can't help feeling sorry for Kate McCann. I would not be surprised if she tried to end her life.
Here is the update Gerry's diary. It's not too long, so I am posting it.
"Day 176 - 26/10/2007
It has been a busy few days for Kate and I. We did our first interview since being made arguidos, for Spanish TV. This was very difficult for us but had one important purpose. We announced that private investigators are looking for Madeleine and that there is a dedicated ANONYMOUS telephone line for anyone who has information, which may help us to find Madeleine. The number is +34.902.300.213. We urge anyone who may have information to please call this number.
The investigators are based in Spain because we believe Madeleine is most likely to be in the Iberian Peninsula or North Africa. They have also released a sketch of an eyewitness who saw a man carrying a small child away from near the apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared. We believe this child was Madeleine. The Portuguese police have released the description of the man previously: he is 35-40 years old, approximately 5
’8”-5’10” (1.72-1.78m), Caucasian with southern European/Mediterranean appearance, slim build with dark hair. We hope that this picture may jog someone’s memory who may have seen this man in the Praia da Luz area on the night or days before Madeleine was abducted. Someone else may be aware of a man matching this description who has behaved suspiciously at any time since the beginning of May."
I too was struck by K's apparent nervousness during the interview. How fidgety is that?! Why the extreme nervousness? It is as though she fears she might blurt something out that she shouldn't. There's a hesitation and almost a fear before she answers every question, and her responses are meek and not at all spontaneous. She seems to be deliberately thinking every answer out before speaking, so we are not getting a real sense of true emotion or feeling from her; her responses are the same rehearsed phrases only in different words. And why no look of shock and horror when asked about the sedatives?
Billie,
She could be on medication. If I were in her shoes, I'd definitely need some type of medication to function.
I agree with the above, Kate looks as if she is in the throes of a nervous breakdown. I think the picture from jane T is very spurious.
Just wish that some light could be shed on the situation
I do tend to agree but first interview in a while, nervousness is bound to occur and of course desperately knowing they need to make a good impression to better their public persona's all adds up to their uncomfortableness. Just to give the other side of things!!!
I am amazed at how much people read into these interviews - the only thing I can say is how repetitive and unhelpful they are. I didn't particularly want to see Kate weep and whether she did or didn't doesn't really mean anything does it? Gerry is still Gerry and Kate is still Kate. I think she may well be in a very bad state and that this whole thing may yet unravel - but she would be in a bad way if she is totally innocent - so there is no conclusion possible from this.
I imagine that somebody somewhere is hammering on their typewriter (ok word processor) keys and writing what will be a fascinating book (if they can address not only the event itself) but the sociology/psychology of the nature of our response, the role of the internet and the failure of spin and media control, our rage/cycnicism/hope/gullability/despair/denail and so on ... I will read that book - but I will read realising that it is mostly a catalogue of our human failures - including our failure to care for and protect our innocent young - who deserve better. It should be all about Madeleine but it isn't, its about all of us.
I fully agree with your last comment John particularly "It should be about Madeleine but it isn't, it is about all of us."
As one of the most bigoted people on this thread I will put up my hand. As a parent, and now happily a grandparent, I am not looking at the case objectively. I am putting myself in the place of the McCanns and am therefor disturbed by their strange behaviour. That behaviour has tended to be like a candle to a moth and as we would say up in this part of the world I have taken my eye off the ball. Madeleine is that ball that centre of our attention that I have been drawn away from. So I put out of my mind the personality traits of the McCanns and look at the bare facts. Nothing, nil, ziltch, zero, bugger all. 6 months on we know virtually nothing more than we did 24 hours after wee M disappeared. We cannot even find out if any of the tapas 7 had a hire car that night. If you consider the colour of Jane Tanner's abductors trousers a breakthrough then so be it, but I firmly believe we are going nowhere fast and that the best way to hide the truth is by confusion. It is a matter of conjecture as to who has muddied the waters more the P.J. and their allies in the Portuguese press or Team McCann with their frankly awful spin. What we can say for sure is Madeleine has not been well served by either.
i too agree with Stanley and John
On the night of 3rd May 2007 something happened to a little, defenceless, loving and trusting, 3 year old girl... that is what should be foremost in our minds.
it breaks my heart that somene betrayed her that night. I look at my 3 year old and thank my lucky stars that she is here with us, safe warm and loved.
I agree a hundert percent with both of you, John and Stanley . But how focus on Madeleine? I believe she died on may 3rd. The parents themselves suggest by their behavior that they know that she is not alive anymore. So what does serving Madeleine mean now?
I'm with John and Stan the man on this one!!!
We anaylse actions, words etc but as we have no idea what these people are like and no idea how they act everyday then how can we judge and its not about them its about Madeleine. Most posts refer to how the McCanns are acting, even their attempts to get the case back to looking for Madeleine has just made more people talk about K and G.
Indeed Stanley - the whole thing is like some kind of strange parody of reality, a veritable pantomime which has as its basis nothing with any more substance than thin air. Remember the attempts on this, or a previous thread to identify the known facts? How many are there? About three or four. We are told almost nothing both by the PJ and the McCanns and yet we seem to be told quite a lot. Perhaps we are not entitled to be told - is it at the end of the day any of our business? But it seems that team McCann thinks its important that we do know something or that we form some good opinion of them.
One of my biggest arguments with the BBC 24 Hour News was that they seemed to think this was some kind of human interest story - with the same status as the love lives of celebrities or similar. Rather than an investigaton into a serious crime be it an abdction or manslaughter. We were invited to suffer with Kate and Gerry and to join in the campaign by wearing ribbons, wrist bands and T shirts. But no one actually asked 'what actually happened', 'how far was it really from the Tapas Bar', 'why did you leave the children', 'what was the time line'. No one asked what about the parents? the only ones who did that were the people on the internet or reporters from the US or Germany. Why did no one at least attempt to supply us with facts?
And here we are, those of us who have not wisely given up, waiting for that breakthrough that never comes, for the bloody DNA that never gives up its secrets, for someone, please anyone, involved to just cough up some kind of basic honest fact, rather than that ever morphing sketch which becomes increasingly less and less like anyone actually involved - as if to say ... don't look here, look anywhere but at us.
Andrea - "But how focus on Madeleine?" - by following the truth! the disservice comes from all quarters - the parents, the PJ playing games with leaks, us, and mostly of course the mirror board home to every insulting an dcrackpot theory (which I read every day). So from me also I'm afraid.
If she is dead then then in respect of her memory lets hear the truth.
Och John and Stanley, youse are just big softies at heart.
How much I agree with you. We are here to consider what happened to Madeleine, not how much we like or dislike Kate and Gerry. And the interview told us nothing. I said these things myself earlier in the thread already this week. (Though I do think we already have enough facts available to at least raise reasonable suspicions.)
The interview was designed to tell us nothing but to solicit sympathy - hence my sympathetic last post, as the interview failed even to do that.
And all the other McCann PR interventions which we are seeing this week and will probably continue to see are, I suspect, their PR (ill-)advisers' attempts to frame the public debate ahead of the possible charges which may be brought if and when the police evidence gathering concludes that they have a case to answer.
At the moment we are waiting on real developments - forensic, interview and other evidence to be finalised and what the police and prosecutor will do as a result.
It looks like the case will not be concluded soon. I also think there will be some surprises - there is certainly much to be discovered.
At the moment, for me, all possibilities remain open. These range from "wandering off" and thence coming to some harm, through abduction by a third party, through accidental death and some cover up by parent/s and/or others, and up to manslaughter or even murder with subsequent cover up.
For me, still, now, the most likely explanation is accidental death and cover up - a serious crime. I still think this on the basis of the facts we know and think we know, and not of the (increasingly unfavourable) impression the poor McCanns - I do feel sorry for them - are giving all of us, however inadvertently.
Good grief, looks like Gerry & Kate don't even believe J.T.'s story or they can't follow the time-line. Read the vigil time below when they think the abduction occurred 9:30-9:45
"Saturday, November 3 is six months since Madeleine went missing."
A four-hour vigil will be held from 6-10pm, with lead prayers taking place between 9.30-9.45pm.
It is during those 15 minutes on May 03 that Madeleine vanished from her holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal while her parents were eating at a nearby tapas bar.
To believe Maddy wandered away or was abducted, remember you have to discount the evidence of the dogs.
Not even worth waiting for the DNA aS apparently it isnt even 80% trusting.
If her parent/s are guilty then I would say if you love her set her free and tell the truth, if not guilty then stop turning this into a circus
wasn't the evidence of the dogs in question?
Only according to Team McCann. The dogs in question are 2 of world's best dogs.
I thought that DNA was more accurate than 80%. Are there contamination issues in this particular case?
ah ok
The DNA they are waiting results for is something called LCA DNA and i posted about it previously
The DNA profiling used in the Madeleine case is that of LCA
_ Low Count Anaysis DNA. In laymens terms it simply means the DNA is broken down to its smallest state and then it is regenerated to form a profile. In doing this the result is flexible as tom dick and harry may be suspects and tom did it but they may have simliar dna so could all be guilty. It isnt conclusive like DNA is. Sooooooo this means they wont get a definite answer, the problem being that Madeleines dna could be similar to many other peoples so the argument is they cannot prove the dna belongs to Madeleine.
Sorry if explanation seems confusing, I hope I made some sense."
Lynn
Thanks, Lynn, and you're right, you did previously explain this and I did read it but I promptly forgot it again. Probably because I still find the entire DNA process rather confusing.
If the DNA proves inconclusive, then we're back to square one again, aren't we.
Lynn: every single piece of evidence is of course in question. If it comes to a court case, these questions should and hopefully will, rightly, be stringent.
It can be that even very strong evidence does not lead to conviction. Viz. OJ Simpson, for example. Many other examples. It can also be that conviction can happen wrongly. Viz. Lindy Chamberlain. Many other examples.
My view at present is based on trying to take all the evidence together, rather than focus on any one single piece. When you add it all together, there is virtually no evidence at all to suggest abduction, whereas there appears to be at least some evidence to suggest an accidental death and cover up scenario. It looks to me, at present, as though the police have some justified suspicions about the parents's involvement.
We will know at some point what all the available evidence is. The various forensic evidence will certainly include a number of DNA clues - I certainly will be interested to see what they tell us, and will not discount anything.
When all that evidence is known we will obviously revise or confirm our hypotheses.
"there is virtually no evidence at all to suggest abduction"
hmmmm...what do you call an eye witness report of a man carrying a child in a blanket and wearing pyjamas similar to Madeleine's pyjamas?
Well said reasonable man - just a note on the dna Billie - the expert stated it was the same type used to attempt to gain verdicts on omagh bombing - as rm stated its a case of adding everything together and making some sense of it.
@Karina
the statement has been changed so many times, alledgedly, its not seen as reliable by some
Chanel I thought Kate was referring to "God's House" too. I believe she could have passed a lie detector on her answers and appeared more genuine etc. then before as her answers were basically generic. I think Nancy Grace said it best "they wasted precious air time defending themselves."
Lynn your statement "If her parent/s are guilty then I would say if you love her set her free and tell the truth, if not guilty then stop turning this into a circus" made me think. Yes, if they really loved her, she deserves respect and that the truth be told!
These people anger me, because I want to feel sorry for them and I want to believe them. But they are in our faces everyday flaunting/spouting something so illogical and insults our intelligence. I used feel maybe it was bad advice, but no they are arrogant and feel they are above the law and no one has a right to ask a question, whether it be a reporter or the police. I am SICK of these people, I am not like that normally, I am a very trusting person (to a fault I am told) and that also makes me anGRY!
Further just checked "the" website and although the 2 sketches are there there is no description like:
The impression, which was released yesterday, shows a man of southern European or Mediterranean appearance walking while cradling a child.
The abductor is 5ft 6in (1.7m) tall, of slim build and aged between 35 and 40. He has straggly or greasy dark hair and is wearing a brown or maroon top and beige chinos.
Further note on those stupid sketches the first light one tries to imply this was an old sketch and the new one is just more detailed...it's the same damn sketch. Think back to sketches in the paper, sketches change or vary (this is simply the first stage of the drawing...nothing changed except the exact drawing continued. If they wanted to be truthful show the "egg man" that was the real previous sketch when J.T. memory was fresh not 5-6 months later.
Why would they think the abduction occurred at 9:30-9:45? That doesn't make sense to me, anybody have an idea? I could believe her body was in transit during that time.
Time for the parents to step up to the mark and tell it like it is, don't you think? That's what they owe to Madeleine.
hmmmm...what do you call an eye witness report of a man carrying a child in a blanket and wearing pyjamas similar to Madeleine's pyjamas?
Karina | 10.27.07 - 6:46 pm | #
Karina - I would call it unreliable at best and, if false, really quite problematic for the person who reported it.
The reasons are as already given frequently above.
Unreliable since: the report has been revised, so much that we now have copious newly remembered details made available in a drawing which were not given in the first instance; and other witnesses failed to see the reported man removing a child.
And problematic for Ms Tanner, if it turned out to be false, because I would imagine that seeking to pervert the course of justice is as serious a crime in Portugal as it is in most civilised jurisdictions.
Does anyone in the U.K. remember the name Rhys Jones? This was an 11 year old boy from Liverpool returning home from school football practice who was shot in a pub car park in broad daylight. His parents grief was terrible to behold but it's dignity could not be denied. This happened at the end of August. No-one has been charged despite 12 separate people naming the same killer to the police. Where are the tabloids calling for the scalp of the policeman in charge as they did for the P.J. inspector. Where are the interviews with the parents, the t.v. appeals the wrist bands the spokesmen the P.R. the spin. How many of you agree that it suits our media to attack foreigners as being inept and useless but when it comes to our own a wall of silence appears. If M had disappeared from a council flat in Rothley for how long would the tabloids have kept their interest?
From here:
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/...on-for-McCanns/
"Last night a close friend of Jane’s said: “She only saw the suspect very briefly from the side and back.
“She just cannot be sure she would recognise the man again if she saw him because she only got a fleeting glimpse.”"
Forget about the JT sighting. The ridiculous sketch drawing was just about saying, "don't look at us - look at this!" As much as I try to give the McCanns the benifit of the doubt it is this sort of thing that makes me annoyed with them. It's their own daughter who they are "not as happy" without. For goodness sake. Maybe I need a rest.
In that W interview (Aug. I believe) she claimed to start getting a full night sleep on day 5. By different accounts Kate is starting to crack, but is it because public opinion has changed? I am tire of being mad at myself for thinking meanly of these people; but should I when Gerry is playing tennis while volunteers (many I am sure on vacation) are searching for his daughter??? It is really disheartening John; so very sad...
Maggie | 10.27.07 - 8:43 am Gerry remains constant. Consistently irritating, especially when he covers his crouch with his hand, an action that as you suggest is one of control. However I see it directed to the interviewer. To me it says loud and clear - back off with intrusive questions - I'm the one in control here.
Absolutely Maggie, we do not disagree here at all. The entire point of body language is to communicate that which we cannot thru words to whomever we are communicating it. So yes both of them are defending and responding to the reporter. I dread thinking of how they must communicate with each other...I would dread looking into the other one's eyes. Which is why it is fascinating to see them both losing their minds slowly but surely.
As they ought to in my opinion. I have made no show of impartiality since I came to this blog to comment - I am entirely convinced of their guilt.
As to honoring Madeleine, may I remind all here that this is a crimeblog. However it is a sad crime and as we all have suspicions about the parents whether we consider them guilty or not (even Karina has doubts about them sometimes )I understand the frustration that comes here now and again as the poor child is not found and neither is her body and those charged with keeping her safe did everything in the book to do the opposite. That is what fuels this frustration - that and the persistent dismal failure of her parents to ever admit they did even one thing wrong. And now they are having a service for poor Madeleine, yet for a mere 15 minutes and the wrong 15 minutes at that. But not the wrong 15 minutes for their case...or one version of it.
Yes Stanley where is the justice in this world when one toddler's life is valued over another child's?
Where is the McCanns' promise to help other missing children, what happened to that? Or will they let them down as well?
Yes Chanel...the parents can't even THE TIME OF THE PRAYER RIGHT (or actually maybe they do in THEIR minds)?
My understanding of the fund is no money can go to another missing child cause/case until Madeleine is found (regardless) and any in any event all perpetrators are convicted in the court of law (picture that)!!! Will there be any money left?
The new Maddie number is rumored to not only cost the customer money, but also make money for the fund...could someone verify this? Sorry...I would love to do some investigating on this, but can't.
I just went to bed still thinking of this case (I wish I were Kate (not really) still feeling rage (which isn't fair; I didn't do anything wrong) and I remembered the movie "Anger Management", that was it for me and I am back at this f'ing computer. The McCanns & C.M. etc. are playing the Jack Nickleson's part. We of course are Adam Sandler's part. That's how I feel...hopefully now I can sleep; if not, I don't think Kate will take my calls.
I think this case has us all frustrated, whether we believe in K and G's innocence or not. Or indeed whether we are impartial. The reasons I think this is the case is that no-one seems to be telling the truth, their never seems to be a consistency anywhere, except for the fact that poor Madeleine went missing. The parents do not act like parents of a missing child, comparing them only to other parents on TV who have losed children, Sarah Payne's Mumu, Rhys Jones to name but two. Therefore I think this is where we get frustrated, I don't want them to breakdown (or maybe I do) but I watch them and find myself frustrated at their lack of emotion, which I guess I deem shows lack of love for Madeleine, wrong of me, yes, but I am just being honest. Then I look at the story JT gave and the picture and again I get frustrated, finally a witness, an image and something to go on and we get the most disheartening and frustrating image I have ever seen. We then learn about the DNA found and wait in anticipation and then get frustrated because it takes so damn long and then we learn it isn't even 80% reliable. Finally we learn that RM is a suspect, SUPER! then we learn he is not a suspect anymore then we learn a witness placed him in the area/at the scene of crime. We then learn he is no longer a suspect again, now apparently DNA of Madeleine has been found in his mothers house and we are waiting news, all frustrating!!!!!
We then listen to team McCann and get frustrated at the "lies" the "spin" the "hype", there is no dignity, no rest from it, we become empathetic towards the McCanns in one breath and in the next they frustrate you, mainly with Gerry's stupidity (i again refer you to my muppet comment.
Overall I think the more we talk about this case, the more we hear, the more we learn the more frustrated we get. In a few months time, still no further forward I do not even think people will remember Madeleine has gone missing it will be all about team McCann and what the parents did or didnt do and who has now given new "evidence".
Harsh words from me perhaps but it seems to be the way this case is going and the lack of respect for their daughter this is portrayeing saddens me deeply. I hope justice will prevail but more I hope Madeleine is found, alive or dead, it would just be nice for us strangers who actually seem to care more than the family she had around her. Again that statement seems harsh but the way they go on I wonder how much they care(d) about that poor little girl. Again I refer you to the reference I made about other missing childrens parents and their displays of affection and devastation.
Where is the McCanns' promise to help other missing children, what happened to that? Or will they let them down as well?
Chanel
@ chanel - the cynical me says Kate in her new role will do this
Karina,
You made a point about the man carrying a child as a case for abduction - this is shored up by Kate believing that Madeleine is with a kindly person (despite the fact that a few weeks ago when a certain photo was published she thought she was surely in North Africa. This evidence of abduction is weighed up against the DNA evidence. When this is done it doesn't stack up. The witness reports and drawings have changed bringing unreliability. If the DNA evidence was released and then those responsible said oh wait a minute that's not right here's another version then we would all throw our hands up in the air and rightly so.
Chanel,
You are right. This is about the parents now. They are being analysed, scrutinised and every move picked over because they are suspects. Others have said the most likely scenario is accidental death and cover up - I too have come to this conclusion especially in the light of JT's recent rememberings/picture.
The McCann Circus
by Moita Flores, Correio da Manhă
The McCanns stopped the searches for Madeleine. They are trying with all their forces to convince that they played no part in her death.
The McCanns have entered in a process of self-scourging. The circus that they were performing for us since their daughter's disappearance is now rising against them. Now they appeared in an interview for Antena3. With organized and studied questions, with a docile journalist and with the same sweet-talk of the old times. No explanation concerning the final destination of their daughter. Well rounded conversation, without nexus, full of common locations, already done sentences but not a word about the reason that brings them to leave alone their children in an unknown apartment, without anybody to look after them.
During two months, the favorite circus act has been the abduction theory. The sky news called before the Authorities, the international press, the political authorities of the parents, even the Police forces cried with one single voice: Abduction! Find our daughter. Never so much people had searched a child around the entire World. But the story proclaimed as the unique and univocally true story was badly told. A portrait drawn under the auspice of one of the essential witnesses was the motto and the motive. Now we learned through the public relation machine of the McCanns, that’s only the drawing of a character. It could be the Captain Haddock or Tintin or anyone of the abductors that appears in that comic book series. And the huge team of private detectives, spokesmen insisting that she is somewhere in Spain, Portugal or Morocco. Why? What’s its basis? What are the objective or subjective reasons that brings to this belief?
I don’t understand how the experimented lawyers allowed this couple, with their credibility degrading day by day, to produce this ritual of hurts that harms those who sees and listen it, because they don’t want to talk. They are joking with us.
They don’t talk to the Police because they are arguidos and they have the right to remain silent. They only talk to the newspapers if they can choose the questions they want to answer and they use complaisant journalist for their staged acts. And when they are silent, they mobilized their allies to prolong the staging. But not a word about the facts.
Nobody doubts that they are suffering. Few have doubts about the truth they refuse to tell.
It would be long until that this case stopped to be in the first pages of the newspapers and exceptionally the Portuguese police or the British police being the sources of the news. The McCanns stopped to search Madeleine.
They try with all their strength to convince us that they have nothing to do with her death. Because they are innocents? May be. But it isn’t in this way - escaping the essential questions, staging tears and cries, escaping to answer the most aggressive questions - that may convince anyone
of their innocence. On the contrary. And don’t say it’s because of the secrecy laws that they can’t tell the truth. When we are innocent, we bawl our bitterness to the abyss of hell. We don’t participate to a circus propaganda of bad taste.
The last comment of Pat Brown on the Maddie case is excellent:
http://tinyurl.com/387ree
POSSIBILITIES IN THE DISAPPEARANCE OF MADLEINE MCCANN
• Maddie is unlikely to have wandered off and drowned.
• Maddie was unlikely to have been kidnapped by a pedophile ring.
• Maddie is unlikely to have wandered off and been abducted though that COULD have happened (if there is no physical evidence of harm or death coming to Maddie in the apartment). If this is true, she is very likely dead.
• Maddie could have been abducted by a child predator that lived nearby. If this is true, she is likely dead.
• Maddie could have been medicated and died accidentally while her parents were at the restaurant. If this were true, the body of Maddie would have had to be moved from the flat and hidden or hidden within the flat prior to Kate’s cry that Maddie was missing. If this is true, Maddie is dead.
• Maddie could have died accidentally prior to the McCann’s going to dinner, giving them more time to move or hide Maddie’s body. The time at the restaurant and the checks on the kids would establish an alibi and move the time of “disappearance” further from any possible witness sightings of earlier suspicious activities of the McCanns. If this is true, Maddie is dead.
• Kate killed Maddie, purposefully, or in a rage, and Gerry came back from tennis and found Maddie dead. He helped cover up the crime. If this is so, Kate would likely suffer from Munchausen’s syndrome by Proxy (if she killed Maddie on purpose – MSP is the label for a female psychopath who harms or kills her children; husbands of MSP women tend to be detached and very oblivious or accepting of their wive’s behaviors) or another serious psychiatric disorder (if she killed Maddie accidentally). They could have removed or hidden Maddie’s body before going to dinner or the body could have been dealt with by Gerry during his checks on the children. If this is true, Maddie is dead.
• Gerry came back and killed Maddie in a rage. If this is so, Gerry would be likely rate high on a psychopathy checklist and be very controlling). Maddie’s body would have been dealt with before or during the evening. If this is true, Maddie is dead.
• Kate killed Maddie, purposefully, or in a rage, and moved or hid her body without Gerry’s knowledge. She would have had to manipulate Gerry into not noticing his daughter in bed (“Maddie’s already asleep, let’s go) before going to the restaurant. She would then possibly have hoped Gerry would do the checks and find Maddie missing, distancing herself from the crime. Maybe, if Gerry actually didn’t do visual checks, Kate finally got fed up and went and did the check herself. If this is so, Kate would likely suffer from Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy or another serious psychiatric disorder. If this is true, Maddie is dead.
Best ecenarios:
Maddie was taken by a child predator.
Maddie died in the apartment and the parents are covering up a crime.
In both cases, Maddie
In the Mirror, Jane gives new details about the events:
http://tinyurl.com/2wx9cz
Gerry McCann had gone to check on Madeleine and her twin brother and sister at about 9.05pm. Ten minutes later, Jane left the tapas bar and was on her way back to her apartment to check on her own daughter when she saw the man heading away from the McCanns' apartment, down the hill.
"Jane also had just passed Gerry and another man, Jeremy Wilkins, talking in the street, so she assumed that Madeleine had just been checked on.
"Suddenly this man scoots across in front of her with the child, which she thinks is a bit strange because the child was in pyjamas and had no shoes or socks on. He wasn't running, he wasn't walking, but he was striding. It was like an urgent walk.
"Jane knows it was a child from the size of the person being carried. It was obviously a small child. There was no doubt in her mind. There have been reports the child was held in a blanket. But Jane says that is not true."
Jane arrived at her apartment, checked on her daughter and then returned to the tapas bar. Soon after, Jane says that another friend Matthew Oldfield, 37, and her partner Russell headed off to make their checks on the kids. But Jane's daughter had become ill and Matthew came back to fetch her.
On his way back - between 9.30pm and 9.45pm - he stopped and listened at the door of the McCanns' apartment but did not enter.
"Jane finished her meal and went up to the apartment straight away to see her daughter"
"Around 10 or 15 minutes later, Kate discovered that Madeleine was gone.
"Jane heard shouting outside and came out and saw Matthew's wife Rachel, who told her Maddie was missing.
"The first thing that came into Jane's head was this person she'd seen. She felt complete horror. Kate was screaming 'She's gone, she's gone' and there was a huge panic."
Do we know the persons who were present at the table of the Tapas bar when Kate came back?
When and where exactly Kate did said “They have taken her”? and who was present?
What is it at the Tapas bar or in the room of the apartement that she said that?
Do we know what they have answered to Kate?
...I still say everybody is in on the fiasco - they know they won't find maddies body - they know they won't find tanners 'suspect' - so all they have to do is spin until everybody gets tired of the whole mess and it will fade away - keep in mind ...if one goes down, they all go down ... who is the weakest link ??? - bombard them !!!
Well I think that there is evidence that we are not party to that will be damning. I watched the RTE programme which was interesting and well worth 22 minutes of your time.
www.rte.ie/news/2007/1025/primetime_av.html
What I noticed was Mr Mitchell was giving the answer to the question and in the next breath saying that he couldn't comment. Very strange. The response from Durant's aunt is most dignified.
Professor of law : Professor Carolyn Hamilton offers her opinion on leaving your children here -
http://women.timesonline.co.uk/
t...icle1762734.ece
as follows:
Scenario 4:You go out for dinner in a hotel complex on holiday abroad, leaving a child aged 3 and twins aged 18 months in a locked room. You return to check on them every half hour.
If the parents have taken all the risks into account and decided that it is safe to leave the children, this would probably be reasonable. If the children were awake or a bit older and able to wander around, or potentially even to open the door to an intruder, perhaps not. But asleep, with the door locked and people constantly checking up on them, it is likely to be reasonable.
You should be checking on them very regularly. I don’t think it’s any less safe in Continental Europe than it is here. Leaving children alone in this manner is not desirable, but parents have to balance the demands of life and will probably have to consider such issues regularly.
A parent needs to ensure that children are safe if they are left alone. Leaving them for a short while, asleep, in a locked room with regular checks is acceptable. Leaving them for two hours, or with unlocked doors, is not.
Hmmm MCanns patio doors were unlocked - but even so this seems a very generous assessment.
I felt moved to send this today to the daily Mirror feedback@mirror.co.uk:
"This article : http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top...89520-20024112/
is ignorant xenophobia. Not only that but it does not even reflect your own readers views (see your forums if you don't believe me).
The McCanns have been quite legitimately been made arguidos (suspects) in the Madleleine enquiry because of forensic evidence analysed by a British lab and inconsistencies in their version of events. The Portuguese police and public gave tremendous support until this happened. I would like to ask why the British media feel unable to ask the sort of questions which might help shed light on this sad case. Rather they adopt this old fashioned jingoistic approach.
As a point of information it is senhor not senor in Portuguese.
Regards"
Well done John! Whoa!! 'Sardine-munching mouth' - omg!!
So 'heartening' to see another case which shows how racist nations still are, the main one in recent times having been the OJ Simpson case. Ugly nationalism reared its head as well in the trial of Bruno Richard Hauptmann for the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby.
We have come so far only to tread the same ground again in terms of life's lessons. How abyssmally sad.
I still cannot believe, regardless of safety issues, that anyone finds it acceptable to leave children home alone, that i will never alter my view on.
RE: What happened to Madeleine, I do not think the scenario of Kate having Munchausen’s syndrome by Proxy as looking at their relationship I do think Gerry is the one in control and think that he wouldn't risk going back to work for fear it happened again. I still cannot believe they did it then went for a meal - struggling to accept that, the only thing i can accept is perhaps Madeleine did die accidntally and wasn't found til Kate checked at10pm. Anyone know how long Kate was away from tapas bar for that check???
John thanks for publishing that. Abyssmal indeed. Utter tripe and should never be allowed to be printed. This is the rantings of a morally bankrupt person.
Kate was away from the Tapas Bar for 5 mins. She left at 10pm and returned at 10.05pm. It takes about a minute to walk there and a minute to walk back. So there wasn't much searching done. I personally would have turned the apartment upsidedown, regardless of whether I knew she had been taken, to look for my missing child; under the bed, in the wardrobe, cupboards in the kitchen, the suitcases, and then I would check again. And I would have screamed from the balcony. But hey we are all different.
Ok yet another scenario:-
say Gerry on his last check found Madeleine had overdosed and he tried resusitating her and she died. He hid her body (obviously i still think my suitcase theory fits so lets say he put her there) then he left bumped into mr w and had a chat for 15 mins - can we honestly be sure thats how long they chatted??? He goes back (MR CALM) and continues to enjoy his night then its time to check on children again and just perhaps this time he suggests KAte goes (it has been stated this was the first time she checked on children) Hence her reaction is natural she firmly believes Madeleine has been taken. Then once they are alone Gerry tells Kate the truth, states he had no choice as 1. he had to make it look like Madeleine was abducted and 2.as KATE was the one who sedated her and she is the one who will go to prison for murder and Gerry didnt want that so Kate has to play along with his plan. Gerry plays on her guilt and emotions to keep her from spilling beans????
Far fetched>? But isnt everything about this Kate - any thoughts on this?
@ MAggie, i would have rushed quickly around the apartment, panicked straight away and ran back to get my husband no doubt in hysterics with 2 twins 1 in each arm, so I cannot judge Kate for getting straight back to Tapas bar for I know I would do the same, only difference being I would have my other children with me, mainly for fear the abductor was hiding in apartment or on his way back.
John
I too saw this article this morning, and am disgusted that this article was allowed to go to press!
At what level does the Mirror's editor deem this journalism. (althouugh IMHO thats the level of reporting by the mirror!)
@ John wouldn't worry that's not journalism and the mirror isn't exactly a respectable paper - does go to show though that they clearly are not representative of their readers nor do they care!
i agree with pdx. I think the conflicting stories constantly fed to the press are a deliberate policy to induce mccann fatigue. i believe that they will do this until interest dies down.
The 'journalist' that wrote that piece in the mirror is tony parsons, an ex music journo and single father after he split with another writer, more famous, Julie Burchill.Both of them are famous for polemics rather than genuine journalism. He's quite a bitter man. He is a writer of opinion pieces and columns designed to wind people up and not to be taken seriously. Still, john, good on you for complaining about him. I wonder what personal axes he has to grind to write such a piece. Perhaps he had to leave his kid alone alot while bringing him up?
Now this article is interesting in a different way. Whilst the other was just mindless, this is quite calculated in what it doesn't say.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/...9/
nmaddy229.xml
no mention that the parents are suspects - as if the 'something nasty in the woodshed' will just go away if we don't mention it. But it does say:
"The international hunt for Madeleine escalated earlier this week when an artist's impression of a potential suspect, a man seen carrying little girl, was released."
They are now truely running their own parallel investigation based on that fantastically helpful sketch of a faceless being.
In a strange way I find this sort of non-journalism as even more offensive than the previous invective. At least that was obviously corrupt and abusive - whilst this is a more subtle way of letting down the readership. Surely we deserve better. I predict the complete collapse of the newspaper industry as a way of disseminating news - if they are not prepared to be honest with their readership then what do w want tem for except perhaps the TV listings and the crossword?
Last vestiges of sympathy have now evaporated - the McCanns have been using fund to pay their mortgage!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages...ge_id=1811&
ct=5
I thought it was called 'leaving no stone unturned' not 'leaving no bill unpaid.' How dare they!!!! It was for her - not them.
John you didn't really expect them to cash in their investments to pay their expenses.
The new phone-line & Zorro (loved that one). So the papers are allowing the spin of an abduction, parents are suddenly not suspects, Maddy is alive in Morocco living with a (I bet, loving and doting) 60 year old woman. Gerry is going back to work Thurs. (remains to be seen). Is this their attempt to get on with their life without Maddy now or get the donations rolling-back in now that she's alive again and "out-there". The phone-line serves a purpose to confuse/divert attention, raise more money, or will there be an anon. tip and a body will be found before Thurs.? Can't produce a body if it is in the sea though, under the road work(?). The 2nd is a little out there, but what are they going to do get get back to living their life as they knew it? It seems as if they want to move on, just my opinion.
According to the Diario de Noticias, Daniel Krueger is back in Praia da Luz with his equipment to perform new investigations. He asked questions to an inhabitant of Praia da Luz about the address of the villa “Liliana”, the house of Robert Murat. Daniel Krueger has rented an apartment in the center of Praia da Luz a week ago.
Of course, Krueger is paid by the McCanns to find the body of Madeleine.
http://tinyurl.com/2umqbe
The McCanns' friends say they were asked by the PJ not to talk publicly about the case. They deny that there was a "pact of silence".
K.
Yes, once again we are asked to forget direct quotes from 3 of them plus the quiz lady, sorry C.M. no...can do and why for God sakes can't the media do that or point it out to dispute it?
I think that the intervention of Clarence Mitchell is a message to the Tapas 7 asking them to remain silent.
It would be very grateful for the establishment of the truth if all the Tapas 7 could tell to the press what they have done and seen the May 3 between 18 and 22h.
Can I start with the positive stuff? Our host Steve now has a Pay Pal that works here in the U.K. So now we have a choice we either pay or get out. I am a Scot it has been nice knowing you all.............
Sorry you are not getting rid of me that easily particularly as all these exciting new developments are taking place. I refer of course to the massive "new breakthrough" by the McCanns new Spanish Dicks. I did leave out private on purpose. Did they not read the script? MOROCCO that is just sooooo August and this is nearly November. We all know there are blonde children in Morocco could they not have tried somewhere different. What of all the sightings of blonde children in Scandinavia surely K&G cannot let these go without investigation. Metodo 3 (for these are the Dicks in question and no relation to the tapas 7) say children are being stolen to order. This is, as I have suspected since last week's dramatic intervention by J.T., the work of the infamous Light Trouser Dark Jacket & Shoes Gang. They rank along with the Tongs, Yardies & Mafiosa. Their membership is restricted to men with long black hair who eat sardines (by the way well done John!). Ownership of a blanket is preferable but not compulsory and all members tidy up after an abduction placing cuddly toys out of reach. I reckon at this rate the Metodo 3 will have the whole case solved before the McCanns have paid off their mortgage. Sorry how silly of me!
Here is the 10/28 update on Gerry's blog.
Nothing really new.
http://tinyurl.com/2b9cpy
Stanley LOL - I hope you paid your winter fuel allowance to Steve for the priviledge of posting that!
I may even open up another open thread and close this one in the next day or so -- I imagine that would sit well with you all. When I "close" a thread in this blogging system, the old thread may actually still accept new posts if you know how to reach it, but it won't be attached to a blog entry. Essentially the commenting system is severed from the blog entry in question when a thread is closed.
As far as Pay Pal goes -- all I'm saying is that my 40th birthday IS on Saturday, so...
Steve - Happy Birthday - when our thread is severed ... will it be painful?
Shouldn't be, John. I'll provide a backlink to this thread as a band-aid.
You'll be getting a pressie from me on your birthday Steve. Good to read that we from UK can donate.
This case now has an air of seediness about it. I don't know why I'm depressed at the news regarding the fund and the mortage payments but I am. I suppose there was always a grain of humanity for the couple within me but that is gone. Why are they allowed to fund expensive detective agencies who come up with the same old story. It's getting beyond a joke. Can someone please confirm to me that I'm not the only one who is confused?
Steve please assure us you will not waste the money on silly things like paying your mortgage but use it sensibly to hire P.R. companies to keep us all informed into your 5th decade.
When George Best was told he was worth ÂŁ1m. and asked what he would do with it he said. "I'll spend it on birds (women) & booze and the rest I'll just fritter away!"
Great advice.
Maggie - the whole thing leaves a sour taste for me - if they are guilty then the enormity of their arrogance and cheek (for want of a better word) is astounding. I spent a long time (August and September) hoping and hoping that they weren't because of what that would imply. But now I don't really care - I treat everything with cynicism including the Spanish detectives in Morrocco (what hapened to the SAS crew?). I only wish for some kind of revelation now.
Someone from the UK Press Complaints Commission was on th radio today saying he had spoken to Gerry about their press coverage - had they been fairly treated. I wondered now if the McCanns were going to complain about the bias in favour of them! cos I see nothing else.
Is the McCann spin working? Are we on this board at an impose regarding the new Zorro (old egg man) & net detectives taking over; do you believe that...that is your right? Who's to know?
C.M. & the tapas are trying to drive us crazy here on the time-line, so we give up and are willing to throw our arms up and go back to our own life.
J.T. has pulled herself out of the picture being at end of the supper (since she left 9:10 ish). Until Kate calls "whatever you choose she called out (up for grabs)", J.T. never returns to the table (neither does ROB), except the quiz lady who has nothing to hide or the others.
J.T. is saying in so many words a new time-line change, from one of the other Tapis Maddie was missing. She is now saying she learned from another Tapas (even though she was Kate's next door neighbor). Maybe J.T. is officially giving ROB a (almost) total aliby. As everything that you can think of as a possibility is coming into to play, maybe Zorro more materialized and Jane was out of the picture in the next room at the point Kate did her thing. BUT...there are witnesses J.T. was at the table...actually at that time with "everyone" else. SOOOOO!!!!!! How does J.T.'s new testimony play with that?
@ Maggie: I, too, feel the case has now reached a new level of seediness.
And I (like JohnUK) have developed a sour taste in my mouth from the sheer insanity of it all.
When K&G were made arguidos, I really took interest in and began studying the case.
Especially since my initial gut reaction back in May was that they were involved somehow. However, I immediately pushed that terrible thought aside because I did not want to believe it, as a mother of a soon-to-be 4 year old daughter (who is smart, spunky, mischievous, animated, silly - I'll stop there, but the point is that there aren't enough adjectives in my vocabulary to describe her)...
But I decided that they must have been made arguidos for a few good reasons, and so I began to look more closely at the "known facts".
To me, the most reliable "known facts" are the very interviews that K&G have given. The discrepancies, contradictions, emotion (or lack thereof), body language - told me then, and continue to tell me, that K&G are involved - and moreover, that M is most likely dead.
I guess I was naive to think then (was it September?) that the case against K&G was strong, and was about to break open, and we were all going to find out what became of M after all, for better or worse...
However, I am now coming to the sad conclusion that we may never know what happened, and that this web of deceit has become inextricably tangled.
Not only that, but I have expended an (almost embarrassingly) enormous amount of time and energy trying to get to the bottom of this case - and it is getting me no where but back to the beginning.
And, as Stanley so eloquently pointed out, I am also guilty of playing favorites in this case - as there are an alarming number of child abuse/abduction/rape/murder cases here in the US every day that do not capture my attention the way this one has.
I have allowed myself to get sucked up into the frenzy that K&G have created around themselves (mind you, it is all about them STILL); I have allowed myself to feel for them. Therefore, whether I like it or not, I am invested in this case, in seeing justice for M taking place.
I have tried to keep my emotion out of it, but tonight, I could not hold back, and needed to rant a bit to you all...
For instance, I am completely stupefied by the outrageous breast and body weight comment by K (what the #@$% does that have to do with ANYTHING??? - I mean, come on, woman, you are educated!), and almost as much as I am her mother's idiotic ramblings about her biggest pain in life watching her daughter suffer (what about MADELEINE'S suffering - which, if K is being honest (cough, cough) then they must believe she is being held somewhere - oh, I guess it is somewhere nice and safe, so no need to worry 'bout that?)... Just the tip of the proverbial iceberg.
Again, it all has just become a circus to me. And what a pity for poor M.
@PDG:
Perhaps you are right - I for one, am certainly feeling the fatigue... Maybe that is all part of the Plan. I better not fall for it - maybe I will stay on the case after all!
That K&G are using the Maddie fund money to pay their mortgage is absolutely sickening. (and the money they would've spent on their mortgage is surely paying for their legal team and PR staff).
When will this fiasco end?
"SHE IS DEAD AND BURIED NEAR HERE”, revealed to the Correio da Manhă, Martin Van Wyk, private south-African Detective, investigating in Praia da Luz.
Correio da Manhă - Are you hired by the McCanns to find Maddie?
Martin Van Wyk - No. I have contacted the aunt of the children, Philomena McCann, by email, I offered my help. The McCann couple knows that I am here, at private title. I don’t have even been in contact with the Portuguese Police, to avoid misunderstandings.
- You are here since one week. What are your conclusions?
- Unfortunately, I think the toddler is dead and the corpse is buried around here, in this locality. I think she has been wandering off the apartment, during the night, in direction of the beach. She was looking for her parents and someone took here. In the following day, confronted with the news that she was abducted, this person was scared. Without knowing what to do, finally he killed her, maybe without wanting to do it.
- What is your experience in cases such as this one?
- I was six years in the Military Police of South Africa and I am a private Detective: A bounty hunter during 15 years. In 1997, I had investigated the disappearance of a 13 years old child, which was finally found dead. In that time I had contacted a Medium woman which vision revealed to be exact. I even talked with her about the case. She has the same opinion as me.
- What do you think about the fact that parents and Robert Murat were made arguidos?
- The parents should have been treated as suspects since the beginning, but I don’t think they are guilty. May be one of the friends is hiding something. Concerning Robert Murat, his garden should have been excavated by the Police. I return tomorrow [today] to Cap Town, with the frustration of not having been able to do more…
It seems theories are few and far between lately and everywhere we look its all McCann spin, intentionally or otherwise its a sad fact now and the last thing being reported seems to be the fact Madeleine is still missing - 6 months on I think I have sadly accepted she has died, however it happened and that I hope she is at peace now xxx
Correio da Manhă reports that Paulo Rebelo was yesterday in Praia da Luz such as others British tabloids like the sun : http://tinyurl.com/yrs557
and the daily mirror: http://tinyurl.com/2jfeda
Correio da Manhă:
Rebelo tests theories at Luz
Paulo Rebelo was yesterday for the first time in the apartment where Madeleine vanished, in Praia da Luz. The new coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department of Portimăo was leading a six inspectors’ team. During the entire afternoon, he has tested several theories and has performed a possible reconstitution of the events of the night of May 3 in the apartment n°5A of the Ocean Club.
With some elements of the Lisbon squad, composed with three inspectors experimented in homicides and sexual abuses, others in robbery and more two in technical analysis - Paulo Rebelo tried to find details and loose ends that could open new lines of investigation or confirm the existing ones.
The detectives came at the apartment, around 15h00 past and just after they begun to open the shutter of the window in the room where Madeleine was sleeping with her two siblings in the night of her disappearance. Next, they passed through the window a blue blanket folded as if it was involving the body of a child.
Paulo Rebelo was really the element of the team who played more attention to the window, opening and closing the shutter several times. The team was interested in the other parts of the house, such as the veranda and the garden in the back of the apartment. There, the inspectors measured the height of the shrubs and the resistance of the small verandas, while the leader of the investigation was coming and going out from the habitation several times. One of the inspectors brought to the house a tambour containing a liquid which has been impossible to identify.
In the middle of the afternoon, Paulo Rebelo crossed the street in the direction of the area giving access to the house of Robert Murat, as if he was measuring the distance between the villa and the apartment. Accosted by the CM trying to understand the objective of the present diligence, he only said that "he was working".
It was 17h45 when the team leaved the Ocean Club: Rebelo and a Woman Inspector walked in the direction of the Miradouro of Praia da Luz - passing near the church - where they stayed almost 5 minutes in observation. Furthermore, it wasn’t the most rapid way; they choose to do a deviation through the several pedestrian streets of the locality.
There is a video in the Portuguese television SIC showing Paulo Rebelo at Praia da Luz:
http://tinyurl.com/2pxxug
Jose - thanks for the video link. I like the way he deals with the press.
Thanks for that posting Jose. Yes the Mirror's headline today is Now They Believe Us. This is in contrast to most of the other papers where the headlines are about mortgage payments.
The fact that the P.J. have returned to the crime scene can hardly merit a headline and the interpretation put on it by Clarence that they were following the course of an abduction was fanciful to say the least. However his statement that the McCanns were "heartened" by this I can certainly believe. They desperately needed something to cover up the real news that they had been caught with their fingers in the sweetie (cookie) jar.
Up until now people like myself who find themselves with an irrational loathing of K&G could only accuse them realistically of bad judgement and/or parenting. The abuse of the fund raises much more fundamental questions about this couple. They know as well as you and I that many people who contributed to the fund were considerably less well off than them. It would include pensioners and single mothers who's sympathies in the beginning were with K&G. The situation now is that these payments do not prove anything in regards to M's disappearance and the McCanns involvement in it. It does however speak volumes for Team McCann.
Many of you have not believed that the tapas 7 could have colluded for all this time with K&G. The directors of the fund have done just that in regards to it's misuse. Did Clarence know of this when he took the job? Did Richard Branson? Did Brian Kennedy? Is there a single contributor to this thread that believes that this expenditure from the fund was justified.
I do hope that someone from Team McCann is watching this thread because I believe right now is the time to "jump ship", starting with you Clarence, because if you continue no-one will ever believe a single word you say again in any other capacity. I also believe the directors of the fund should resign and not sacrifice their own reputations for this seedy pair.
This would not be a case of "rats deserting a sinking ship" because in this case the rats will be the only ones left on board.
"The directors of the fund have done just that in regards to it's misuse. Did Clarence know of this when he took the job? Did Richard Branson? Did Brian Kennedy? Is there a single contributor to this thread that believes that this expenditure from the fund was justified."
Ehem, excuse me, Stanley, but as usual you just love to hate, which speaks volumes about you - not about the McCanns.
It clearly states on the Madeleine website - and always has - that
"Madeleine’s Fund was set up to:
1. Find Madeleine;
2. Support the Family; and
3. Bring the abductor or abductors to justice."
Note point 2. But I think you are beyond noticing anything besides your own prejudiced mind, Stanley ...
You should be blocked from this thread because of the hate campaign you are trying to set up here.
Martina : "You should be blocked from this thread because of the hate campaign you are trying to set up here."
Are you serious! Stanley is entitled to express himself as much as you are. He thinks they should not have used peoples contributions to a fund to find Madeleine to pay off their mortgage. I agree with him. The rest of us have to struggle on with finances even in times of great adversity and do not get bailed out by public contributions. Have the parents of the thousands of other missing children or victims of crime received this kind of support? No. The McCanns should have thought twice before doing this and it does reflect a massive misjudgement both on their behalf and those who are advising them. They have spent Ł300k so far and I think they need to account to the contributors on what and how this has been spent.
So Stanley has a valid view and you should not be calling for him to be blocked.
Worth a read if you haven't already:
http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecas...inal-
steps.html
Martina : "You should be blocked from this thread because of the hate campaign you are trying to set up here."
I think we have a friendly, intelligent and fun bunch of people on thi site. Sometimes we get passionate about things and perhaps do not think things through. This is a discussion forum and everyone is entitled to their opinion - a valid one too Stanley, I donated and I do not work as I am a ft mummy but was desperate to do something to help. I dont regret the donation, not at all, I do not have issues with the fund being used to support the family either as I feel that the children have a right to stay in their home, surely they have suffered enough. Perhaps had they stated that they would need to pay their mortgage people wouldnt deem it so wrong.
FROM THE SITE :-
NOTE
1.1.3 To provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine’s family. "
What saddens me is that this case is soooo popular amongst everyone but look at other parents who have lost children they get nothing but a sympathetic ear. I am sure Rhys Jones' mum for example would love a donation to help find who killed her son OR the family of Keith Bennett so they can dig up the moors to find their sons body so they can have closure. I guess what i am saying is their will always be better use for some of the money so I can see the anger of some re: paying the mortgage but on the otherhand the money is being used as they loosely stated on their site.
Well said Stanley and John.
i agree that Mccanns have put the,selves under the spotlight, so they have to expect a lot of scrutiny.
it does seem really shady they are using the money donated for ther missing daughter to support themselves
"I think we have a friendly, intelligent and fun bunch of people on thi site."
Sorry, Lynn, but I don't find Stanley in way friendly. I find most of his contributions extreme, out of context, wrong, and offensive.
Without wishing to prolong the mortgage debate, you have to remember that the not fr profit company was set up by the McCanns friends and family, so they decided what were the fit a proper purposes for the fund and decided to define them in this way i.e. to include "1.1.3 To provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine’s family." and that this was after the money came flooding in - because before this there was no mechanism for doing anything with the donations. They could of course just given the money to one of the established charities on the basis that the chairity would coordinate the campaign. But they chose to do it themselves and what they did was perfectly legal.
However I doubt very much that people donating thought that it would be used for anything other than searching for Madeleine. I doubt that they thought it would be used for paying for a spin doctor or for the mortgage. If I had been the McCanns I would have made absolutely sure that nothing that it was used for could be seen as being for my personal benefit. And it is a case of not only following the letter of the law but also the spirit. These people are not poor and I am sure they have their own resources, or at least their families do. When it came to decisions about the mortgage I think they made the wrong one (and there may be other things to).
I recall a remark by Gerry that it was 'frustrating' that they couldn't use the fund for their legal protection - this was before Richard Branson waded in. Obviously whatever is done for with the fund will have some indirect bearing on their legal costs and so on.
Of course nothing in any of this has any bearing whatsoever on whether the McCanns are some how guilty. So in a way its a non story.
Returning to the case in point - I was wondering when reading about the reconstruction by the PJ - passing something out of the window and so on - how easy would it be to climb out of the window with a child in your arms? You couldn't very well put her down while you clambered around - perhaps this means that there were two people involved and that's what they wre trying to work out.
I agree John the mortgage debate has nothing to do with the case really.
Sadly this whole case seems to be focused on anything but finding Madeleiene and finding out the truth. It all seems to be about Gerry and Kate nowadays.
Was on another website and came across the term the McScams and I thought how sad that this is what some think I mean at the end of the day these 2 people lost a child and ~Madeleine is still missing, we must not forget that and I do not think calling the McCanns does anything but lower ourselves to the level of McCann Spin.
@Martina, I respectfully disagree Stanley did nothing and has done nothing but make his point heard on here as we all have, that is no reason to ban him or indeed personally attack him, regardless of your agreement or not. I have never found anything in his quotes to be offensive, sometimes he speaks as he finds, a quality I think one has to respect in another person.
Re John I agree with you it's impossible to pass by the window with a child alive in a blanket that s why probably they were two.
But if the child was dead, one person was sufficient. The body could be put in a bag (or a suitcase) and thrown by the window.
I doubt that a predator who has planned to kidnapped a child since a long time, will take the risk to transport the child in his arm or in a blanket across the street. He would certainly drugged the child and put it in a bag so anybody could see it.
I agree with the fact that a predator would be more cautious, surely they would have simply parked their car in the back alley and drive away rather than risk walking through the streets carrying a child.
With regards to the carrying of the child surely most people, especially a doctor, would find it suspicious that someone would carry their child like that (in the fainted or dead position) rather than snuggled into them with their head lying on your shoulder (the loving protective position)why was she not suspicious straight away, especially as the little girl was in pyjamas.
Another point didn't JT state RM was the man she saw and point the finger at him straight away hence the reason he became an arguido.
Re Lynn The description of the person that Jane Tanner has seen, is a person with long hair almost to the shoulder. If Tanner had the intention to accuse Robert Murat she would describe the person with short hair as Robert Murat used to be.
Robert Murat was suspected because Fiona Payne, Rachael Mumpilly and Russel said to have seen him the night of the crime. He was suspected because he has his own car, on the contrary of the Tapas 9. He was suspected because Jane Tanner saw a man with a child going in the direction of his house. He was suspected because he was too friendly with the Police...
Actually Lynn good point. If there is anything at all to the JT sighting then that would rule out planned premediatated 'professional' abduction. Because they certainly would have parked a car near the building and so on, not walked off down the road in full sight with no attempt at concealment.
Yes you could probably get the child out if she was already dead in a bag or whatever. But then why would you? You don't abduct dead children - so then we're back to the family/friends or my old favourite a burglar.
So either there were two - or she was dead - in both scenarions JT's sighting makes no sense at all. Unless it was the burglar - but then he's a really inept one.
There's a nagging voice telling me that the JT thing is made up ... therfore why would she make it up ... therefore they are concealing the truth to protect themselves.
I know this has been gone over before - but there we are, its better than talking about the damned mortgage.
If Team McCann are listening please could I have an article in the Express or Mail tomorrow dealing with why JT's sighting makes sense. Thanks.
Ah ok thanks for clearing that up Jose. So much spin I forget who said what these days.
I was wondering does anyone know where Gerry bumped into Wilkins, the exact location if possible.
Re John I think we can define a profile of the supposed abductor seen by Jane Taner: a strong person, with low education almost "inept", suffering from necrophilia.
It's interesting that this private agency METODO 3 reported that they have found a kidnapped American girl in Morocco but there is not a word of it in the American press.
Is there any more information on this young girl? Has she been reunited with her parents? This should be front-page news.
K.
Forgot to post the link in the Daily Mail about the Metodo3 finding of a kidnapped girl which gives hopes to the McCanns.
http://tinyurl.com/2gdtol
Re Karina
Read this article posted by John from the Gazeta Digital:
http://tinyurl.com/2tyypf
"A source from “Sureté Nacionale”, the Moroccan intelligence services, denied this information and told (..) they didn't have any information about the American girl or Madeleine McCann sightings."
Thanks, Jose.
It's not very good PR for this agency to pull a stunt like this one. What were they thinking??
K.
I see no evidence of a hate campaign being set up here. I find this forum very civilised and sometimes a little heated but owing to the subject matter it's not surprising.
Now, a couple of things have interested me from my reading on the internet.
The first is the testimony of an Irish teenager who was furtively smoking a ciggarette (can't shorten it because this is a US blogsite). She saw Gerry McCann and Jeremy Wilkins talking but only for a few minutes. She did not see Jane Tanner or the putative abductor that Jane describes. However at around just after 10.15pm another Irish family saw a man carrying a toddler and he was walking towards the beach.
These, to me, are important eye witness accounts. The first one is truthful because the teenager had to fess up about the smoking. The latter account suggests four things.
1. Madeleine's body was being disposed off by someone she knew.
2. Madeleine was abducted by a local
3. For it to be Madeleine, she would have had to have been sedated.
4. It was someone innocently carrying their child.
The other piece of interesting information is that the police have phone call conversations crucial to the case and suggest a death (of unknown means) and cover up.
Now when are we going to get the forensics?
Karina,
If you still want to know who had a car among the McCanns friends, I think that no one had a car.
There is this article about friends of Russel O Brien and Janne Tanner: James Garrod and his wife Charlotte who had rented a car at the Aeroport of Faro:
http://tinyurl.com/2sdtyx
Karina,
Agreed and I also would add what were the McCann's thinking of when they hired them?
Re Maggie Now when are we going to get the forensics?
A journalist from the portuguese television SIC asked yesterday to Paulo Rebelo when they will arrived. He answered: I am working. Thank You. Thank You.
Yesterday, they also said that the arrival of the results is imminent.
Karina,
Re your latest link posted at 2.39, which is interesting and worth a look. Why in heavens name would the couple be upset that the police contacted them. Surely this means that they are being eliminated from the enquiry. Good to see that the general public was on the ball. I bet there are hundreds of witness statements not yet out there...
Free the Stanley One!
Sorry Martina but it is interesting you should single me out. Others on this thread have suggested that K&G have comitted actions much worse than anything I have said. Of course the problem is that until that last posting I have tried, with limited success, to use humour to debunk the McCann spin. I omitted humour last time cause I could not find anything amusing about the misuse of funds. However as many on the thread have commented this is about M not about K&G and their behaviour.
If you take for example Jane Tanners "sighting" and treat it as a serious piece of evidence then you are doing all cocerned, especially M, a great disservice. By opening it to the oxygen of humour you put it in the place it deserves in this case, which is nowhere at all.
Sorry I made a boob of my last post which should have said Jose instead of Karina.
In the link Jose made at 2.39 I had to smile at a post on the subject. It was dated 15/8/07 and said something to the effect that the 'bloods' results should be coming in any day now....
Stanley, please "go on with your bad self" as we say here in the US. Your style is fresh, and you always have points to back up your rants.
I wonder why Martina did not ask me to be banned as well, since my last 2 posts were made in frustration as well - and were not necessarily "nice."
If I were you, I would take it as a compliment, and feel special that she singled you out. :D
@ MAggie re: However at around just after 10.15pm another Irish family saw a man carrying a toddler and he was walking towards the beach.
When and where was this reported I havent heard that story.
...OMG - it is ok to "hate" stanley - just don't "hate" the McCanns -
...if I had contributed to a Find Maddie Fund and they had used it to make their house payment the McCanns would have gotten a letter from me using much worse language than stanley used and I would want my money back ...NOW !!! Gerry has other income besides his practice - what would poor Kate do if she had to get rid of her nannies because she couldn't afford them - or is the fund paying for that too -
Hi All,
I just couldn't keep away after all.
Got up to date with the latest comments. For the record I too was very dismayed that the fund was used to pay 2 months of the McCanns mortgage (Ł4000) although of course they are legally allowed to - it's not exactly true north on the moral compass to do so.
I happen to agree with you John about the JT 'man carrying child in pjs' story. I was suspicious initially because it only 'came out' several days after 3rd May - JTs bizarre explanation was that she'd never mentioned it earlier because she didn't want to upset Kate! Then she couldn't produce any meaningful description, then much, much later (too late surely to do any good) a fuller description of the man, now minus the blanket, with clothing details and longer hair emmerges. I don't buy this at all but am at a loss as to why she would make it up other than to 'smokescreen' actual events around that time.
Liz
Without your humour, Stanley, this all would be unbearable!
@ Lizbee: Welcome back. Could it be that J.T. has erected a 'smokescreen' for her partner Dr O'Brian as he was missing from the table for a time that has still to be determined and came back with a complete change of clothing. She was by her own admission alone in their room for a while with him and their supposedly sick daughter. If he at that time had admitted any wrongdoing it might be possible that she mentioned the sighting as you say as a smokescreen.
http://tinyurl.com/2bkmtl
Robert Murat to be interviewed again.
So, it looks like the Tap7 people did not have a car, which eliminates the suspicion that one of them helped in the disposal of the body.
How about Murat?
Do any of you think he might have helped the McCanns?
hmmm...I have yet to laugh at any of the attempts at humour made on this case.
But I am glad some find it entertaining.
K.
I wondered just IF perhaps JT and Gerry were in on this together, perhaps, just perhaps Gerry deliberately chatted to wilkins so that JT could "dispose" of the body - just a thought.
Ah Thanks Stanley (I'll back your 'justice for the Stanley One campaign!
Re: JT & the smokescreen, Yup I think covering for RO'B would do it for me, something nags me too about his changing his clothes and reportedly the sheets on his daughter's bed even though the MW staff denied any new sheets had been requested or given... Hmmm.
@Lizbee WELCOME BACK!!!
@ Karina - I think sometimes you have to have "light" relief for such a terrible and disturbing crime and this site has a good mix - keeps me from getting to distressed as i find this somewhat unbearable at times. Yet this site does offer very good, constuctive opinions of which all are a part.
I do think a lot of backpeddling has been made by the new PJ to try to do what should have been done in the first place.
Re Lynn
RTE the Irish television station did a recent programme on the disappearance.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/
1025...imetime_av.html
Hope the link works!
Karina, I don't think that Murat helped the McCanns. How did the group get to and from the airport? Taxi or a day car hire?
I never really thought Murat would help McCanns... I'd need to be convinced why he would involve himself in a crime he didn't commit.
Liz
Thanks Lynn and I agree that PJ are backpeddling at a far faster rate than they ever went forwards!!
Liz
thanks for the link will watch it
Aha! the first of the books I predicted (ok it wasn't difficult) has appeared
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages...770&
ito=newsnow
doesn't say if it is in English though.
Also welcome back lizbee.
Ta muchly John, Yeah I saw the book link too, I reckon he'd make sure it was available in English but it's probably a joined up version of our comments on here!
Liz
I wrote it haha
Ouch, Karina.
I commend your outstanding ability to remain unbiased. Perhaps you should have been a judge! 
Back to the subject: has anyone an opinion on the Mirror thread regarding the phone call evidence (posted by TigerWoods)?
I am leaning toward believing that there may well be phone call evidence that can trump any forensics (or lack thereof)... Seems to make sense to me, when I try to understand the mindset of the PJ.
Thoughts?
Hey Liz glad your back! Throwing some answers out re above.
As I remember reading a couple reported the seeing a child being carried in a blanket towards to the beach but it was at 9:50. This couple actually had met R. Murat before and stated "it wasn't him, they would have recognized him" they are sure. Wonder if they agree with the zorro sketch (attn. journalists)?
I see no reason as well Murat would help them to that extent. I could believe he loaned them a car though as mentioned in the press.
Further, no has mentioned their other friends in or near PDL who kept the rental car for them after the dogs & the police did their thing. Wonder who these people are?
Maggie they took a shuttle bus from the airport there is video.
Remember the quiz lady stating how Gerry asked her to sit with them and from 9:30 till Kate "does her thing" she states only R.O'B. is missing from the table. I think she is the most reliable just finished work (not drinking, etc.) So that implies M.Old. (9:30 check) is at the table & J.T.
In reply to an earlier posting, " No witnesses- what about the witness who saw a man carrying bundle/child, wearing Madeleine's pink pyjamas?". The 'witness' was one of the Tapas 7 lucky herself not to be named an arguida by the PJ.
Emma I read that thread (very interesting). There also was a good quote Sousa had made public...but basically backs that there is a possibility that that police have a phone call or something they have said that one or the other have hung themselves on. Whether it is a phone call, text, maybe time of call to the police...there is something the police have from the lst night. Emma do you remember the Sousa quote?
Sorry, Dee, I do not recall the Sousa quote off the top of my head. Sounds familiar.
Perhaps this is the "key" that allowed the PJs to declare K&G arguidos. I just feel that there must be something concrete on which to base their suspect status, or they would not have gone to such a length as to make them both arguidos.
Of course, with all the background rumblings from Team McC (such gems as "dirty nappies & rotten meat"), the PJ may well have fairly solid forensic evidence as well, and are just biding their time until they can fit all the pieces of the puzzle together. I fully believe that the PJ is doing the best possible job in such a convoluted case.
On an instinctual level, not scientific, I could easily fathom K calling her mother or aunt to decompress/gain perspective after a terrible "accident" or "disaster" before thinking through the consequences and repercussions. Perhaps mom/aunt suggested the abduction idea? Again, just conjecture. But what else are we left to do, until we get more evidence?
Dee,
I thought the video was the shuttle bus from the airport in England to the plane, not from Faro to PDL.
Buses are usually laid on from airports (I've been to Faro and got a small bus to our destination).
Also the quiz lady said that one member of the group was never there...
We have hired cars for one day only to take us to and from our destination. No-one knows. The trip the McCann's took was a short one, no more than 6 days.
Emma, I like that thread on the phones. Very good.
Maggie you maybe right, there is a you-tube video (famous for Gerry's F-U remarks) go from England to the PDL at some point (I don't know).
Quiz lady yes, I agree, was only pointing out M. Old (supposedly left at 9: 30) & J.T. (last weekend, she quotes basically she was in the room next to Kate & only heard about the abduction from another Tapas). If we believe the quiz lady, these two other statements don't add up.
Re Murat from statements from the rental car company, he wanted to rent a car fast...as he had lent his car to one of the Tapas.
All scientific evidence has been contaminated
Check out the article in the Daily Mail
http://tinyurl.com/2ejhf6
Even if forensic evidence points to the McCanns, we already know what the defense will say.
This case will never end, I am afraid :-(
Found the quote from Aug 16th
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,2...54157-
2,00.html
Mr Sousa, an official police spokesman, said they were now sure Madeleine died on May 3, just days before her fourth birthday.
He said there was "MORE" evidence than the forensic samples, insisting: "The investigation does not depend just on these results." But he gave no further information.
24Horas
The PJ is waiting a 'miracle' to save the investigation
The Polícia Judiciária needs more evidences. In reality, it must 'happen a miracle' that would allows us to know what happen to the little Madeleine McCann, the May 3, when she disappeared from the apartment in the Ocean Club, in Praia da Luz, Lagos, Algarve.
'At this moment all the evidences, collected by the former team, are reevaluated. Besides, we are still waiting some results of the analyses ordered to the laboratory of Birmingham, which could produce a revolution in the investigations - which could reinforce our suspicions relatively to the McCanns or could eventually open a new line", affirmed to the 24Horas a judicial officer close to the investigations.
Furthermore, the elements collected during almost six months didn’t allow to conclude nothing with absolute terms.
'It s good to let the people be informed of the notion that in this case all the possibilities remained open, although we have our own conviction" admitted the same source.
This officer has stressed that the team of the Polícia Judiciária that had worked in the case is highly experimented and no evidence has been put away: "If something has been badly done, but it didn’t seem to have happen, the guilty couldn’t be attributed to the men and women that are performing the criminal investigation."
Yesterday, Paulo Rebelo, leader of the case, has made a meeting with the former coordinator, Gonçalo Amaral, precisely to understand all that has been done.
It's because of the non-arrival of the expertises of Birmimgham, that the prosecutor of the Republic in charged of the Case, Magalhăes e Meneses, didn’t have authorized already the departure of the PJ team to England, which purpose was to participate to the interviews of the McCann couple, family members and friends present in Praia da Luz when the toddler vanished.
Another source close to the investigations has justified the reason why the apartment wasn’t closed immediately, such as reported the 24Horas, it was because 'the eventual author or (co-author) of the disappearance' of Maddie could 'return to the crime scene to recover some forgotten objects."
Don’t be surprised to read with this panorama from several sources of the PJ questioned by the 24Horas that the evidences existing until now "are tenuous".
Yes, I discussed previously DNA will be stated as contaminated and that, as with other cases, will be the defence, if required.
Let is just hope the new PJ can make sense of all the evidence, which we still do not know, and come up with the conclusion that does Madeleine justice.
Regarding the mortgage payments, I have mixed feelings on this. If the Mccanns are innocent, why should they lose everything, their house as well as their child, their reputations, their jobs...
How else can they pay their mortgage at this time? Neither can work, realistically, with the public as doctors while suspects, and this could last for months..
They cannot claim benefit probably because their 'savings'(the fund) are too much. Income support would never pay their mortgage while they have over a million in a fund that they can legally use for family expenses plus can you imagine the bad publicity they would get if they tried to claim welfare.
Perhaps all their own savings are used up?
On the other hand, I take the point that this money was never given to pay their personal expenses. I think every person that donated did it to pay for private detectives, or perhaps to highlight generally public concern about missing children and the huge child porn industry.
(Although I don't understand why it was donated really. How does giving money help find a child? More public muddle-headedness and sentiment?)
However I remember reading that the Needhams went broke trying to look for Ben in Greece, going back and forth... and only gave up when their own money ran out.Which is not right is it?
Met a journalist recently who just did a big article for an american magazine on the child porn industry. She says it is growing all the time, the internet has led to an explosion in child porn. Why is this? Have there always been latent paedophilia in a large part of the population? Or is this the last taboo in a sex saturated society?
oh and happy birthday steve, you just had to be a scorpio as the author of a crime blog! (shh stanley)
On passing a blanket substituting for a child out the window, remember the blonde woman in the light-colored coat that a woman witness saw outside of Madeleine's window? Maybe I was right, maybe it Was Kate and there is more than a possible abduction being enacted but also the hiding of the body.
******
We are all appalled that Kate went jogging the next morning. We are all appalled that Gerry played tennis a day or two after his daughter was allegedly abducted while other vacationers searched physically for the child. We cannot understand it, we would never behave this way.
But you believe Kate & Gerry did do those things as those very activities were reported in the early days of this case by legitimate press sources.
Then why is it so hard for some of you to believe these same two people could have dinner and put an easy-going face on it despite knowledge of their daughter's death? Why?
We are appalled at the 'campaign', their words, yet we see the spin, we have heard their lies, we are appalled almost daily by their ongoing actions. Yet some here still cannot fathom how two parents could possibly carry on as 'normal' at dinner following the death of their daughter.
We say there is something weird, wrong, strange, even disgusting about them. Yet some cannot believe that these same loathesome characteristics were present in these two Before the tragic incident and not only After.
Have you ever had bad news, terrible news, but you had to carry on at work despite it, or entertain guests despite it? Did your mind not keep helping you with 'Just get thru this', 'Just a little longer', sort of thoughts? Did you in that circumstance perhaps forget the terrible news for a while? Perhaps you even had a few drinks while having to play at 'normal', while putting on a good face. One does this for example when one has heard that someone far away is dying but you cannot leave the office yet or your party. In entertainment 'the show must go on'. Like that.
That's what got the McCanns thru that nite. They put off dealing with it. They may have put it off too well in fact - 'Let's just act normally so no one will get wind of anything' led to jogging and getting a tennis lesson. Then they began to really see that they were getting away with it, so they kept up the charade. And now they continue to do so while they are fighting to keep their other unfortunate children and their 'freedom'.
But they are not free. They cannot put off dealing with it forever. One of them is breaking down visibly and the other is rigid to keep from cracking or possible implosion.
Great post Chanel. Food for thought. The point you make about making sense of why they could go out to the bar that night is something I hadn't thought of before.
PDG - Yes many people go broke when looking for their missing child. Emotionally and financially bankrupt. Have the McCanns been paid for thier newspaper, radio and television appearances?
"Pinkdrummergirl," I'm actually a triple scorpio, according to a chart I had drawn up in college. Rising sign is scorpio, moon in scorpio, and at least two other planets in scorpio. Being a true crime writer/blogger was almost an inevitability. Either that or I become president. Or a serial killer. Lord knows neither of those sounded appealing, so I'm good where I'm at
pdg - "However I remember reading that the Needhams went broke trying to look for Ben in Greece, going back and forth... and only gave up when their own money ran out.Which is not right is it?"
Well its not right but there is no fear or suggestion that the McCanns are anything near going broke. In fact they are not themselves actively involved in looking for Madeleine. Can't believe anyone thinks paying their mortgage is ok - part of the reason we are all so confused/tired of this case is the constant spin in the UK press - this is being funded by the fund!
What I find most interesting about the mortgage situation is not so much what it says about the McCanns finances but more about their working relationships. I cannot claim to know much about eithers employment circumstances, maybe others on the thread would know more than me and inform us. I just find it strange for example K is obviously a part time general practitioner. Therefor she is a team member. This member has just had the traumatic experience of losing a child and they have ceased to pay her? I find that strange.
G is a (consultant?) heart specialist, I am assuming N.H.S. What heartless bunch decided to stop paying him. If he had killed 20 people on the operating table he would be suspended on FULL pay pending investigations. Maybe someone from Team McCann could tell us when they ceased to be paid and who made the decision on behalf of us (the tax payers)? to stop their income.
@Steve & pdg: Scorpio, Smorcio just enjoy being 39. On Saturday as long as the Sun is not in Uranus chill out!
OOOOOOh happy birthday Steve I would have baked you a cake had I realised !!!
With regards to the fund - personaaly i think it just detracts yet again from Madeleine hence I wont dwell on it.
With regards to the timing and discussions Gerry had with Wilkins I am wondering if perhaps JT was somehow involved and she was the one who with perhaps the help of Payne removed Madeleine as perhaps to cover up her husbands involvement - the reason I ask this is that simply would any of you leave your child alone if they had been sick NOOOOOO yet they did allegedly
I was thinking about the abductor seen by Jane Tanner.
I was trying to understand where was Jane Tanner and where was Gerry.
I wanted also to know how much time was the abductor present in the scene of the crime.
I was thinking: When did he enter? Did he have enough time to clean the bloodstains that were detected by the dogs? Did he bring with him some products of housecleaning or did he find it in the apartment?
Then, I found this old article in the Daily Mail:
http://tinyurl.com/37wsbo
"Madeleine's aunt Trish Cameron recalled that she received a call later that night from her younger brother, Mr McCann, who told her: "I went back to check the children at nine o'clock. They were all sound asleep, windows shut, shutters shut."
"[Wilkins] says that he met Mr McCann, who had come out of his apartment at 9.05pm, and had a word with him. Soon after that Jane Tanner would have crossed paths with Mr Wilkins and his baby."
Madeleine was there alive between 9h and 9h05. May be the aductor came at that moment.
"Another of the group, Jane Tanner, says she took her turn 10 minutes later [after the return of Gerry]. She claimed later to police that she saw a dark-haired man of about 35 carrying a child as she walked back to the bar afterwards but thought nothing of it."
Madeleine is with the abductor at 9h15 [one or two minutes after the return of Gerry], probably dead I thought, going in the diretion to the church as we know now. So the abductor would have 10 mn to enter in the apartment, eventually kill Madeleine and clean all the bloodstains.
"Soon after her return - at 9.45pm - Dr Oldfield did his round of the bedrooms. In a first statement to police, it is unclear if he actually went inside the McCann flat."
"However, in a second statement Dr Oldfield insists he did look in Madeleine's bedroom, believes he saw her there, and that there was light coming in through the windows as though the heavy shutters had been opened."
After having done a trip in the direction to the church, the abductor returned to the apartment and put Madeleine in her bed again. Why did he come back? Certainly, he wanted to leave the body there as if she died accidently.
"At 10pm Kate McCann got up from the table to check on her children. She slipped in through the patio windows to find the twins safely asleep - and her daughter's bed empty."
"In tears and calling out Madeleine's name, she ran back to her friends to tell them: 'They've taken her, they've taken her.'"
The abductor changed is mind at the last moment. He took the body out of there but he forgot the cuddle cat.
I think the fact the cuddle cat was "moved" to a "safe" place tells a story - if it were an intruder they would kick it out the way and not care about putting it up high.
If it was there I think if it was your childs favourite toy wouldn't you want her to have it with her??
I think that is the reason why there was no intruder.
Re Lynn If Jane and Russel lied that means they are involved. The Paynes could also been involved due to the fact that they were present with Kate when Gerry was playing tennis: at 18h30 for David and 19h for Fiona. They Paynes were present at a moment when Madeleine could have died.
Just a thought...
Last week-end, we had dinner in a restaurant with 3 other couples. I am trying to remember who left the table, at what time and how long were they gone. I cannot remember anything in detail and I did NOT have any wine or cocktails.
How can the Tapa9 remember the exact time of all these movements? No wonder there are some discrepancies in the time line.
Karina - yes, totally agree - I think I would be hard pressed to remember these sorts of things. When later pandemonium set in I imagine it was so confused that no-pne can remember the proper sequence. The same goes for things like exactly what Kate is supposed to have shouted. I imagine the only way to sequence it is to decide what order things had to happen in and to see if peoples accoubts fit this. For instance if JT says she saw someone but Gerry and his mate saw no-one were they wrong about the time? I still doubt JTs evidence cos it changed so much in detail and there may be consequences for gerry if his time is wrong. But who could put anything to within 15 mins on an occasion like this. Its different if you're at work or whatever because time is much more important but when on hols. who bothers to check the time?
Dee 11:42pm
The article you posted said:
"MISSING British girl Madeleine McCann died on the night she vanished, a Portuguese police chief said today as tests revealed blood found where she had been sleeping was not hers."
It was NOT Madeleine's blood???
Lynn
Can you show me a photo of when Madeleine has cuddle cat in her hand? The only reason we know that cuddle cat is so precious to Madeleine is because the parents, well Kate, told us. We have to accept they are telling the truth.
Re timeline. Watch the RTE programme to be accessed on my link is at the post timed 5.36pm. In it Clarence Mitchell states he will stop the interview if the timeline is mentioned!
The forensics are not in yet so I wouldn't believe what I read in the papers regarding them.
Good to see you back Lizbee. Steve, I'm a fellow Scorpion!
We were very focused to what Kate said: did she really say “they haven taken her!” when she came back to the Tapas bar? I think we should be also be interested in what the others answered to Kate or said to her.
That sentence "They Have Taken Her" is unintelligible: if the other tapas 9 understood what she said that means that they knew who THEY are and WHO has been taken. If they didn’t, at least one should have asked: who has taken who?
The nanny Pennington said she heard Kate saying after the alert: Kate was a with a friend repeating the name of Madeleine and they have taken her.
The sister of Gerry had also heard Kate saying that while she was on the phone with his brother and after the alert and not when Kate arrived at the Tapas bar.
I have found nothing in the press concerning the comments of any one of the Tapas 9 concerning this unintelligible sentence and I am not sure that she really said that at the bar.
Karina,
Yes, but if you were specifically leaving the table in order to check on your children, you would remember how many times you checked. Checking on your kids isn't the same as leaving to use the restroom or making a phone call. Especially if you asked someone in your party to check on your own kids. Then you'd know exactly how many times that individual left and approx. at what time.
Re Karina If you want to know when was the first time the PJ spoke about the death of Madeleine look at that link you will also know what Sousa exactly said,
http://tinyurl.com/2kklof
There are two videos:
-Police Interview
-The ongoing inquiry into Madeleine's disappearance
RE: time checking
I made a point earlier that how can the waiters confirm times etc. Anyone who has worked in a bar or restaurant couldn't - they may be able to tell you what they ate, maybe, but thats about it. It is impossible to take that as confirmation. With regards to the Tapasalatas as someone referred to them on another site again you may have a rough idea of who was checking on what times but when you are having fun sometimes time slips away from you. I know because I am forever pissed at my husband who forgets to ring me or rings 30 mins later than planned because he is out having fun. OMG that makes me sound like a nag but i am not - just ask him hehehe
@ Maggie - never thought of that
wow how cynical and untrustworthy this case seems to be making us
Jose 12:52pm
Jose,
I knew that the PJ had suspected the McCanns for quite a while but...
I was asking Dee about the blood. Did it belong to Madeleine? The article she mentioned said it did NOT.
re Karina
There is no official declaration about the identity of any DNA test.
We dont know if it is the blood of Madeleine.
But it was said in the press that it wass the blood of a man from the north of Europe in a first time. And later that it was suggested it was the blood of Madeleine.
My point was Sousa said, "there was "MORE" evidence than the forensic samples, insisting: "The investigation does not depend just on these results." But he gave no further information. So even if the DNA is botched or there is none...there is still some kind of evidence.
The Correio da Manhă reports that a British organism is analyzing complaints against the article of Tony Parsons published in the Daily Miror where the Portuguese Ambassador of the United Kingdom, António Santana Carlos, was attacked for his declaration about the Maddie Case.
Re: Timeline many of you will remember that this is my particular fixation with this case. As for the T9 getting confused as to who checked when I don't think this is quite accurate for the simple reason that they stated that they were sharing the checking resposibilities and that the children were checked at 1/2 hourly intervals therefore someone was logging who's turn it was and when they needed to be checked next. Even allowing for the flowing wine and distraction of the group meal there shouldn't be as many inaccuracies and contradictions as there are (shutters, doors etc. open, locked/unlocked blah, blah, blah)... unless of course this is what they are covering up all along. I don't believe the timeline that they all gave witness to exists. My first thought when the story broke was that the children had not been checked on, that's why they don't want the timeline questioned, I think this is the guilty secret that the T9 share.
I think G went back to the apartment for another reason... his wallet, mobile, camera whatever; he was miles away enjoying the night and didn't really take much notice of the children when he quietly snuck in for the item and snuck out again, hence his later claim that someone could actually have been there in the appt at the same time he was, this now makes more sense... if you weren't really checking you wouldn't notice. As for JTs smokescreen about the man with child this I think was both to confirm the checking routine and to divert attention away from them and towards a possible abductor. Another reason I don't believe JT is her delay in telling anyone about it. If it really happened she would have mentioned the strange scenario as soon as she got back to the table - '...you know I've just seen something a bit wierd..'and she certainly would have recalled it as soon as M was found to be missing - last seen dressed in the same pjs that child she supposedly saw was wearing!!
If you try this theory out for size the window of opportunity is much bigger and it throws far more weight behind a possible abductor.
K & Gs behaviour makes more sense too, they know public sympathy would be very low if this came out and the thing about little white lies to save face is that they end up getting bigger and more convoluted as you try to squeeeze the untruth into the narrow space left by the truth, particularly so if there are so many of you involved. Important too that everyone obeys Gs rule not to break ranks, no-one must mention the timeline.
Thanks for the welcome back everyone
Liz
makes interesting reading
http://www.anorak.co.uk/madelein...ann/
177212.html
@ Lynn: John Stalker clearly thinks there is a 'big secret' too. What do you reckon to my theory on this?
Liz
@ Liz
yes something definately doesnt add up, i think i mentioned in an earlier post, if JT had seen a man carrying a child like that then why wouldnt that ring any alarm bells to me it certainly would, i mean she was carried like a "dead or fainted" child rather than a loved and cared for child. Who carries there children like that, noone i am guessing.
I think you raise some good points, I just find it so unbelievable still after all this time, a film wouldnt have this many twists in it or be this unbelievable.
Your post about the timeline is interesting Lizbee. If I can be allowed to quote myself from earlier:
One of the problems I think the McCanns have is that if their checking up stories are true, it actually makes their abduction story less likely. Possibly grimly ironic... A reasonable man | 10.12.07 - 3:20 pm
It is of course possible that the McCanns have had nothing to do Madeleine's disappearance, though my guess remains that they did, in some way. It appears to me that the story about the shutter was a deliberate falsehood told on day one - and that makes every other story from the McCann group more suspect in my view.
Liz I am so glad you are back with theories, you are so articulate you could write a book. Going through this theory I can't really buy it because even what they did admit to (leaving the kids that night) could require a charge. So if they checked every 5 minutes or 45 it is still a potential charge and how would they precisely know the law?
Regarding your statement "If you try this theory out for size the window of opportunity is much bigger and it throws far more weight behind a possible abductor." Again you have to remember the dog evidence (of course, we really don't know "any" evidence). Also there is supposed to be other evidence according to Sousa. But as days go by we are finding out...we know very little, so I understand we have to re-evaluate everything!
We know under Port. law they could be charged with a crime on negligence, with all the heat on the others, why wouldn't they fess-up (take a plea deal and for the 2nd time in history get a PR firm) or just crack (and say shit...we didn't think)? Everyone wants this case put to bed with the truth.
J.T. changed her story now...she was in the apt. (next door to Kate at the time) not at the table and her of the abduction from Fiona(?). Quiz lady and other Tapas say at that point (earlier versions) they were all there.
Supposedly there is OTHER evidence towards Kate & Gerry and absolutely NONE towards an abductor; except for two sitings. Jane is even ruled out by 3 witnesses (Gerry is one), the other siting I don't know? Where is the press, did the Irish couple recognize Zorro in the detailed sketch??? That would be priceless!!
Just updated R. Man excellent point.
Bottom line they said the left the kids, I think in the beginning it was even 15 mins. now stretching to 30. No difference and stories are stretching TOO much...JT, ROB, Payne (Kate). Unfortunately it has to be bigger!!!
AR Man, Hmmm I'll take a walk in the park with any theory so long as it's acknowledged that the T9 witness statements regarding their actions on the evening are not accurate. However I can't bring myself to believe that there was a deliberate act on their part, an accident or an abductor within a wider time frame I could buy...
Liz
John where are you? I remember you have pointed out that you maybe didn't believe the kids were checked at all or something like that...could you explain more there please?
Dee, my thoughts on why they're keeping up with their bizarre version of events is that they are narcissists, to them opinion of others is uppermost they cannot go back on statements made to police as that would mean that they would show themselves up as people capable and willing to manipulate the truth.
This is suicide to a narcissist and they don't do that, after all they are far too important to rob the world of their virtues.
Dee - er, one of my many (and probably rather fruitless) theories is that it wasn't actually routine to leave the kids at all but they had to say they did in order to make abduction feasible. I think a waiter has been quoted as saying that only O'B left the tabe (or something like that). Anyway if the whole idea was fabricated at first ... then to make it sound not so bad to leave the kids then they say 'oh, we checked every half hour.' Then it becomes a mess because of all the comings and goings.
When I first saw the now famous Ellibean videos it struck me that no right minded person would leave their children unattended in that place - ground floor, backing on to a dimly lit car park, out of sight from the Tapas and so on. So I thought maybe the 'oh, we always left our kids' thing was a fabrication. And the pact of silence is because its not true. They only left them on that one night. And they did that to fake an abduction. But if anyone says this then it begs the question - why did you leave them just on that one night.
I know that they said they left the kids in Greece - but I think the McCanns didn't go on that trip. Maybe when they went to Chaplins they made arrangements or Diane Webster stayed behind - with all the kids in one apartment (sound familiar?)
So Gerry says to Kate: When you go and check - we've got to convince people that she's been abducted by a pedophile ring or child traffickers. You've got to say then that they've taken her. Ok?"
So Kate runs back saying exactly that: "They've taken her!"
This kind of makes sense if you think that they are already trying to project the idea of a group abductors.
All pure speculation and wild flights on=f fancy on my part and I'm not saying for a minute this is what happened cos its full of holes - and relies on the doubtful idea that Madeleine died int he afternoon.
Liz I agree they both demonstrate narcissist qualities no questions and that is why they could go to dinner (scary, but not rare unfortunately); I do understand and agree. I am not good at expressing myself, but I meant to imply about the others...they have not as much to loose, because they could been charged back then with their stories. When they saw the media & Gerry in particular spinning out of control, someone would have said "uncle", even months ago in my opinion. Now JT, ROB, Payne and even the others for the "R. Murat" stories are making them look like suspects. I really believe it is more than leaving the kids alone, because that was said in the beginning. But I also do not believe everyone is involved.
John one of my many (and probably rather fruitless) theories...LOL we have all been there done that and won't know anything till the fat lady sings (but this hasn't even gone to court & we have OJ...even OJ didn't need PR).
Thank you John, and I bet the doors were locked during the day when everyone was OUT to keep passports, cash, etc. safe. Can't prove that of course, but I get what you are saying. I know remember that debate. That makes perfect sense why the time-line is changing, who's checking...there was no one checking? So if this is true, I can understand K&G; but not the others. With the recent additions on the time-line...the others are burying themselves more, so why would they do that if they still could be charge with neglect?
Dee, Just to confirm the narcissist's viewpoint and how it affects those around them. I have a sister with severe narcissism that members of our family have never truly recognised as such, so they frequently pass off obvious displays as something else e.g. she's taken up with her business affairs and hasn't realised that she missed yet again... a birthday, anniverary, or... she never returned calls, and only calls when needing something for her/her family, and always has to be centre of attention, needs to gloat about her material possessions that far exceed everyone elses - points out where she went right and they went wrong, buys presents (if she does at all) that show know understanding of the presentee themselves but her version of what they should be, blah, blah, blah. I'd learnt to live with it.
But then there was a more serious incident at a family wedding in which my guest was (without provocation) assaulted by narciss. sisters (known to be violent)partner. The family bolstered by various inaccurate details & untruths in their stories supported them and suggested I rid myself of this friend that had upset things so and ejected us from the event. As I am a very peace loving person I just walked away, there was no point mentioning how hurt I felt and physically hurt my friend was (as we were actually the injured party) as a result I hadn't had contact with many members of the family for over a year until a recent tragedy forced us together and we silently agreed to bury the past.
My point being that untrue stories told by such people can carry a helluva lot of weight... and the T9 aren't even related to K & G.
Unless you've really witnessed narcissism in polite society as I have you can miss the finer points to it and power that it holds.
So are you suggesting these people are being subjected to G&K narcistic personality? If so..."all of them, every single one, including someone's Mom who presumably just met them?"
I agree & have my own personal experience and friends have shared theirs. I have read different stats. on the population who have this disorder from about 1 in 20 to 1 in 8. In my experience, from also having (your twin sister LOL) my own sister, and a sister-in-law, amongst others through the years, I can understand first hand the harm. I have read the descriptions on how to spot these people and it can be so vague because people also fall into different catagories, etc. A rule (in my mind) to use if you are not sure if someone has this is are they empathic? This is the biggest trait these people are lacking; they have no feeling for others in any way other than themselves. I really feel for people dating, because these people are so good at con-nieving it takes years to spot them & the devistation is real.
Sorry Liz I hit send to soon...I can do amazingly, weird things! Where were we...It is, will always be about them, but I think it rises above just being selfish. It is really scary, and I know first hand how easy it is to be sucked in (duh, somehow I still let it happen or it happens, but I understand/tolerate or puke (Stanley said puke)).
But in this case...almost 6 months later Tapas are coming out once again to change the time-line...so I don't/ can't buy Gerry with a conning line or a big stick sucking the others in...if there wasn't more to the story than child care.
Last week the story was they were going to be re-interviewed...it didn't happen, however stories came out from the silence and the time-line changed again. I can't ignore that.
On a personal note Liz, thank God you know and understand what you are up-against. Knowledge is KING!
Forgive me for writing so much just backing up Liz to your lst paragraph, my wonderful Godmother (aged 77 & a stock wiz) says to me all the time "just because they are family, doesn't mean they give a fck". I laughed when she said it years ago...but I always remembered that and when I forget...she reminds me.
Dee, Absolutely as regards spotting the tendancies.
Re: Changing stories way after the event I have only my own sad experience to go on so I must go (reluctantly) back to the event I told you about and what I can say is that people were still willing to either stick to or change their stories to be in even greater accordance with popular view; in other words it actually got worse as a 'universal truth' became the 'new past event' and nothing I said could change that despite gross inaccuracies and the actual fact that this was not a true version of events at all.
Certain members of the family chose this time also to air any grievances they'd ever held against me which were included into the pot of 'family member most disliked' meanwhile my narciss. sister was fronting a campaign to totally swamp everyone with these views - she phoned them constantly (crying when necessary) to propagate her views. She wined and dined them she hosted parties and sleepovers the like of which no-one had ever been treated to by her in her million pound mansion house and the main family Christmas do was held there last year (no we did not attend).
That's why I walked away for a long while. I realised then that I am different to the rest of my family, I am empathic to the needs and feelings of others generally, I tell the truth wherever possible without hurting anyone, I believe in the greater good but I am pragmatic in delivering this. But most if all I am consistent in being my own self of which I am reasonably proud. I pass on my moral compass (as close to true north as I can steer it) to my children and friends and I hope for the best from everyone else but as always I'm open to other viewpoints.
Back to the case in point: there is a new universal truth about the timeline on which the T9 are all agreed... You asked why members would involve themselves in the lies and I can't answer you other than point to my own illustration above... I wouldn't buy it but some people would all the way down the river until it near drowned them is all I can say.
Liz
Correio da Manhă:
PJ will verify the babysitters’ version in order to clarify the deposition testimonies
The English nannies that were working in the Ocean Club when Madeleine vanished would be interrogated by the Polícia Judiciária, in a formal way, in the next days.
One of the nannies had allegedly revealed to the private detectives hired by the McCanns that she had caught -in a declaration quoted in the British newspapers -"a man hiding outside Madeleine's holiday flat" where she was sleeping in her room at Praia da Luz. This data must be confirmed, it’s an important fact that was unknown to the PJ.
Paulo Rebelo - as he has done two days ago with the staff of the Tapas restaurant, interrogating them by surprise- wants to understand what everyone of the British nanny employees did see exactly during the afternoon and the night of May 3. The new coordinator of the investigation wants to clarify all the doubts regarding the alleged sightings only revealed six months after the disappearance.
The objective is to cross check with the first depositions and try to find loose ends. These new information should be also be cross checked with the version of the McCanns and their friends. "Now, suddenly, all the people said to have seen something. But before nothing was remembered", confessed to the CM a source from Mark Warner company.
The interview to the babysitters will be done in the next days, because they have finished their time of summer work in the Algarve, and they are going to return home. Some of them have already done their time and others would be working until the end of the next week.
The Tapas restaurant, where the parents of Madeleine were eating in the night of the disappearance, is also closed, some part of the staff had finished their contracts and others are in vacation.
It just seems to me that EVERYONE from the Tapas78or9, I keep forgetting how many of them there is!! to the Nanny, the waiter, the hotel staff, even people related to them back home have inconsistent statements. What is amazing to me is that after 5 or 6 months people suddenly remember something that happened. Think back to a time when something happened, good or bad, you can remember the details the next day let alone a few months later, granted we do remember the odd thing but its the detail i find amazing that some "suggest" they can.
Our memory is a very powerful tool and can play tricks on us, unintentionally, our willingness to want to help or want to remember can sometimes distort the truth too, after 6 months all I am saying is I cannot believe that 100% correct, even if we firmly believe that to be the case. Also thinking about a time when I had a car crash, it was a bad one, no one was hurt luckily but all four of us had a different account of what happened and I 100% believe my account yet it didnt match any of the others, none of us were lying we were just telling our version of events. There is that possibility that the Tapasalatas are simply doing the same, hence the inconsistencies as they are recounting things as they remember them.
Finally with regards to the shutters being open/closed I guess perhaps K and G thought it best to say they were down, perhaps they thought they were, perhaps they panicked and thought omg what bad parents we will look if they think we didnt even bother to close them and after seeing the video of the alley etc I cannot believe they left them alone let alone thought it was safe to do so.
Clarence Mitchell reads German Jokes:
http://tinyurl.com/2xmknj
TITANIC readers introduce themselves
Today: The Daily Mail http://tinyurl.com/36rfou [and also The Sun: http://tinyurl.com/32w4o8]
and their readers don't understand the German humour. No wonder, they're British!
Dear british readers: You can subscribe to TITANIC Here:http://tinyurl.com/34qam8
We assure you, not one cent will go into the McCann's house mortgages!
Breaking news. Gerry has gone back to work for 3 half days per week. He said "Unless Madeleine is found we are not expecting any significant developments in the near future". He then said he would take any questions, we could not hear the questions but he refused to answer the first one as it did not relate to work another he said he did not know about. I shall try to find out more.
re: Madeleine jokes, its a sad fact of life people seem to be able to find humour in sadness, never understand it myself, there are so many fun things in life why feel the need to make jokes about pedophilia or missing children. Yet above all the McCann spin has turned this case into the biggest joke yet.
pressed enter too early oops, the makers do defend it stating it is not to make fun of Madeleine but to poke fun at the media moguls. This was also the case re: a c4 programme about pedophiles Brassed Off, perhaps just such a raw subject matter.
Sorry to sound as if I am harping on about an unimportant issue but may I explain?
I cannot understand why K&G's colleagues, partners, employers whatever could be callous enough to stop paying them in what, until anyone proves otherwise, are horrific circumstances outside their control.
In Kate's case is this to do with the cadaver dogs incident? As I remember, and I would like more info from those on the thread, Kate claimed the dogs were smelling the 6 dead people she had been in close proximity to shortly before her holiday. As I understand it this was either not validated or denied by her partners. Is that correct? As for Gerry surely they would put him on what we call in the U.K. "gardening duty" which means you get paid leave. Is there someone in management who made what appears to be a very vindictive decision?
Stanley, I think it's fairly standard practice to suspend someone who has been charged for a crime. In this case, even though G&K have yet to be charged, they have been named official suspects and, with the huge media circus surrounding the case, it's quite understandable that the employers in questions would want to keep G&K away from the workplace while the investigation continues. However, I agree with you that they should continue to draw a salary; perhaps not directly from the employer but surely from employee benefit funds which they undoubtedly paid into.
According to the General Medical Council in UK, Gerry qualified as specialist 31 March 05, Kate only on GP register since 31 Mar 06.
Anyone know where they were working since graduation in 1992/93 and as what?