Re: Follow the money trail.

by Brian Griffin 19.12.14 18:24

And yet there are many out there who will defend them to the hilt.

It beggars belief!

In my opinion.

by Realist 19.12.14 19:09

ultimaThule wrote:

The fact that the McCanns did not avail themselves of these services makes perfect sense to me, Florianne.

Indeed, they may have lived to tell the tale of two baby bears as opposed to three.

by stillsloppingout 19.12.14 19:57

Just catching up .original post.
Hmmmmm as i have said before about new posters and left field theories ....but that aside
not credible, but thanks for putting it out there
oh well another TM defence option scuppered !!.

by universe 20.12.14 1:44

Everyone should be looking at SUNDAY evening as the night when Catriona was in the apartment babysitting M adeleine when the accident happened. Craig Mayhew, the Mark Warner UK operations Director has some explaining to do.
'''

by universe 20.12.14 2:40

After the SUNDAY evening accident behind the sofa the Mccanns could not risk an autopsy result and the Mark Warner Company could not risk another childminding negligence allegation which could remove their licence to operate.

by universe 20.12.14 2:47

After the SUNDAY evening accident behind the sofa the Mccanns could not risk an autopsy result and the Mark Warner Company could not risk another childminding negligence allegation which could remove their licence to operate.

by universe 20.12.14 5:36

The Tapas group all had a Duty Of Care to report their knowledge of the Mccanns use of sedation on their children to the authorities. Because they agreed not to , they made their pact of silence and had to continue the charade with them.

by universe 20.12.14 6:23

On the Monay 30th. April when Madeleine's name was shown to only stayed in the creche for 15minutes and then taken out again was the day that Mark Warner's people in on the coverup wanted the Mccanns to stage a beachside abduction and not a bogus abduction at apartment 5a. However, the Mccanns dissagreed with initial plan and wanted to have the abduction in the apartment so as to keep their hold over Warners to maintain their use of their finiancial and legal protection sources.

by Joss 20.12.14 7:01

universe wrote:The Tapas group all had a Duty Of Care to report their knowledge of the Mccanns use of sedation on their children to the authorities. Because they agreed not to , they made their pact of silence and had to continue the charade with them.

Yes they did have that duty of care to report seeing as it involved a missing child and consequent police investigation, but if it also implicated that they were also using sedation on their own children, then maybe non of them wanted that type of publicity in the MSM either?

by Liz Eagles 20.12.14 7:54

Weren't Pike and Trickey connected with Mark Warner?

by universe 20.12.14 15:22

The members of the Tapas group who were doctors and knew the Mccanns were sedating their children had a Duty of Care to report such abuse to medical and welfare authorities or lose their medical licences as a result of not doing so. I hope the twins are now being protected from the continuation of such selfish , damaging practices.

by Silver Shuffle 20.12.14 15:55

M
Why sedate the children when there is a nanny to look after them?

by universe 20.12.14 16:02

As Aquila has posted on June 18th. 2013 " It's all about the contract, if you pay a babbysitter that person is expected to remain in situ for the time of babysitting. A breach of this contract would be neglect ". Mark Warner and their nanny would of been aware of this obligation.

by universe 20.12.14 16:23

Universe to Silver Shuttle... Because "old habits die hard", ( no pun intended). And, as Kate Mccalm has stated "It was our holiday too you know!" The Mccons would not have wanted frantic phone calls to the Tapas restraunt from the babbysitter sayjng " Madeleine has woken up and is giving me her twopence worth so you must come back".

by Guest 20.12.14 16:27

universe - what do you think those responsible did with the body?

by Silver Shuffle 20.12.14 16:30

Reading Catriona Bakers statement, it did surprise me that she was so devastated. She only apparently knew Madeleine from the kids club. With plenty of other kids one wouldn't imagine she would get so close to any one of them. And she was "whooshed" 48 hours later. Maybe you are onto something.

by universe 20.12.14 16:44

Universe to Lady in red,,, The Mccons removed Madeleines body on the Tuesday, the same day that Murat arrived back in Portugal. That same Tuesday evening Kate Mccon was heard crying for Maddie, "Maddie, Maddie" in the apartment by Mrs, Fenn , and she suddenly, abruptly stopped crying when she heard Gerry arrive home,

by Khaleesi 20.12.14 18:05

universe wrote:Universe to Silver Shuttle... Because "old habits die hard", ( no pun intended). And, as Kate Mccalm has stated "It was our holiday too you know!" The Mccons would not have wanted frantic phone calls to the Tapas restraunt from the babbysitter sayjng " Madeleine has woken up and is giving me her twopence worth so you must come back".

Sorry, but it has no sense at all. A professional nanny calling the parents, because the kid woke up? Seriously? Who would want to pay for such a crappy service?

by Guest 20.12.14 18:20

It makes sense to me. Don't forget, the children didn't know the nanny, having arrived at PdL the previous day, so, if any child woke, the normal course of action for a babysitter (which is what the nanny would have been hired for), would be to call a parent, as a stranger would be unable to soothe a crying child. IMO.

by Khaleesi 20.12.14 19:17

Ladyinred wrote:It makes sense to me. Don't forget, the children didn't know the nanny, having arrived at PdL the previous day, so, if any child woke, the normal course of action for a babysitter (which is what the nanny would have been hired for), would be to call a parent, as a stranger would be unable to soothe a crying child. IMO.

But they already spent one day in the creche, didn't they? That's one. Two, A child who woke up doesn't equal a crying child. Three, did the personel of the night creche drag the parents from the restaurants and bars any time one of the kids woke up? Don't think so.

by violet6000 21.12.14 5:45

universe wrote:On the Monay 30th. April when Madeleine's name was shown to only stayed in the creche for 15minutes and then taken out again was the day that Mark Warner's people in on the coverup wanted the Mccanns to stage a beachside abduction and not a bogus abduction at apartment 5a. However, the Mccanns dissagreed with initial plan and wanted to have the abduction in the apartment so as to keep their hold over Warners to maintain their use of their finiancial and legal protection sources.

Universe, in this scenario, who would have been at the creche on Monday if the accident happened on Sunday night?

by universe 21.12.14 10:02

Universe to Violet... Sadly, Madeleine never went to creche as it was closed on Sundays and she died on SUNDAY evening. If you read all the statements on files you will read all the lies and coverups by Mark Warner/OC and the Mccons in detail.

by Guest 21.12.14 10:16

Violet's asking about Monday 30th creche attendance.

by Silver Shuffle 21.12.14 10:18

I understand Universe as Madeleine never seen the Creche from inside.

by Ashwarya 21.12.14 14:08

It seems it was the other Madalene who went to Kids Club on Monday and was signed in by GM with her friend Elizabeth. Both girls were "borrowed".

Universe's contributions are fascinating, and explain a lot of things I had been tussling with, although I have always thought Maddie must have died at the weekend.

Log in for more topics