Re: "She's Cowering In a Wardrobe Or Something" Kate McCann on Oprah

by Verdi 15.12.15 22:46

They cry but they shed no tears..

ETA: Just wading through the video of the McCanns appearance on the Oprah Winfrey show, uploaded on YouTube by HiDeHo. I say nothing of the host, she's a highly successful business woman and I know plays to her audience but I think this interview show the couple for what they really are. Goes on a bit but well worth another airing when you've got 45 minutes to spare..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNI5up44Nho

KM and her customary Oscar winning performance and GM sitting in his favourite position, slouching on a studio sofa before a rolling camera, like he's doing a party political broadcast on behalf of the thoroughly nauseating 'innocent until proven guilty party'! The bloke is the personification of everything I despise in human kind - one day someone will knock that complaisant smirk off his face.

by Verdi 15.12.15 23:14

...... One day someone will wipe that complaisant smirk off his face ...... Hang on - think someone's already done it..

"She's Cowering In a Wardrobe Or Something" Kate McCann on Oprah - Page 1 GmccannR0709_468x434

"She's Cowering In a Wardrobe Or Something" Kate McCann on Oprah - Page 1 GmccannR0709_468x434

In true pantomime style - BEHIND YOU...

by **Hobs** 15.12.15 23:59

A face that looks like a slapped arse.

by maebee 16.12.15 1:45

[size=36][size=50]cower[/size]

[/size]

[kou-er]
Spell

Syllables

Synonyms
Examples
Word Origin

verb (used without object)
1.
to crouch, as in fear or shame.

fear, imo Sad

by Guest 16.12.15 10:54

Verdi wrote:...... One day someone will wipe that complaisant smirk off his face ...... Hang on - think someone's already done it..

In true pantomime style - BEHIND YOU...

2 days later they were out of there.

Incredible as that seems.

How was that allowed to happen?

Isn't "don't leave the country" standard fare?

by TheJoker 16.12.15 11:10

Especially when they were being filmed making a run for it by the media. Why weren't the police notified so they could be stopped?

by NickE 16.12.15 11:44

BlueBag wrote:
Verdi wrote:...... One day someone will wipe that complaisant smirk off his face ...... Hang on - think someone's already done it..

In true pantomime style - BEHIND YOU...
2 days later they were out of there.

Incredible as that seems.

How was that allowed to happen?

Isn't "don't leave the country" standard fare?

......or the UK said:
"Let'em out of there or we stop giving money to Portugal"

by Verdi 16.12.15 12:14

BlueBag wrote:
Verdi wrote:...... One day someone will wipe that complaisant smirk off his face ...... Hang on - think someone's already done it..

In true pantomime style - BEHIND YOU...
2 days later they were out of there.

Incredible as that seems.

How was that allowed to happen?

Isn't "don't leave the country" standard fare?

I believe there lies the answer to the entire charade. As good old Percy Thrower used to say (before Alan Titchmarch was invented).. "I think the answer lies in the soil" - to be read with a countrified yokel accent.

by Verdi 16.12.15 12:18

TheJoker wrote:Especially when they were being filmed making a run for it by the media. Why weren't the police notified so they could be stopped?

It was a bi-lateral agreement winkwink

! Thinly veiled by some verbiage spewed forth about their preplanned arrangement to leave the country around that time - they only needed to hasten their departure ..

shark

by willowthewisp 16.12.15 12:33

Verdi wrote:
TheJoker wrote:Especially when they were being filmed making a run for it by the media. Why weren't the police notified so they could be stopped?
It was a bi-lateral agreement ! Thinly veiled by some verbiage spewed forth about their preplanned arrangement to leave the country around that time - they only needed to hasten their departure ..

Hi Verdi,or an extreme amount of pressure applied by GB over the EU proposals of acceptance of joining conditions as full members?
One thing that the media and no UK Police Commander has given to the public is the "Close ties" of officials involved in the machinations,listen to some videos of Hidehos,eg Justine McGuiness,Clarence Mitchell,John Buck and no answers from questions asked,just fibber excuse's,etc?

by j.rob 16.12.15 14:49

Ladyinred wrote:@j.rob
Madeleine was 22 months old when the twins arrived.

I stand corrected - although I note that in Kate's book she says that Madeleine was just 20 months old when the twins were born (p37).

by j.rob 16.12.15 15:10

Hobs wrote:It is also worth noting that they had family flying down whenever they had spare time to help kate with the children.
Then there is also the nursery helper who ended up helping kate with the children at home.

It seems to be that no one trusted kate to be left alone with the children.

Could this be why there is silence from the families?

Guilty knowledge that, they new there were issues in kate and gerrys family.
Guilty knowledge that by saying nothing they may have contributed to maddie's subsequent death, disposal and cover up?

Now that Maddie is no longer alive, kate became less volatile, she could manage with two.

Is it a case now that the families feel what is done is done, the the twins are currently in no danger as they have grown older and have become easier to deal with.
(I do wonder what will happen once they hit the terrible teens)

They perhaps are keeping a closer eye on the twins, even if from a distance and also monitoring the relationship between kate and gerry and when it seems fireworks are in the air, perhaps stepping in.

We know the marriage was in trouble before the fateful trip and money was tight, all grounds for rows and fights.
Now they have money and can currently meet their financial needs, they will tolerate each other.

They are tied togeather since if one broaches separation and divorce, any custody fight could end up with one parent speaking the truth of what happened to stop the other getting custody, especially if there are mental health issues in play.
The classic if i can't have them i am making darn sure you can't either and we all know how that has a tendency to end up as.

The other is well if i am going down i am not going down alone and then proceededing to name names and deeds and taking everyone down with them.

At the moment, legally they are in limbo.
When Dr.Goncalo Amaral wins and the mccanns are liable to pay huge fines, compensation and a whole gamut of legal fees for both sides from multiple cases, then i see the twins being at risk of genuine harm>

With the mccanns it is all about appearances, having the right jobs, the right house in the right area, the right car, the right social circles, the right memberships of the right clubs.
What will happen when it all comes crashing down, when their supporters (most of whom have already jumped ship and distanced themselves) turn their backs and disown them.
Everything they worked for all down the drain.
They become simply another pair of abusive parents.

No matter how they try to spin it, so far that have failed to nullify the neglectful parents stigma.
They had to 'admit neglect' in order for there to have been an abduction.
It was a stain on their character they hoped would be washed away by public sympathy.
Spend enough money, call in enough favors and nothing will happen.
For them, anything and everything can be bought with enough money or threats.

They are both narcissists enabled by their parents, especially kate being an only child.
Is the silence from their families guilt because they raised their children to be completely selfish narcissists who believe the world owes them everything, who raised them to be the centre of their own universe?

Is it a case of if we has been stricter, raised them better, none of this would have happened?
Maddie is dead because of what we did and didn't do to and for kate and gerry?

Time will tell.
Their dam is cracked, and, sooner or later the water of truth will breach the dam of lies and all will be seen and known for what it is and was.

Their arrogance will be their downfall, imo. People have seen through them and seen through the McScam. However I believe they are probably relatively minor 'players' in the general scheme of things. While they achieved some very high profile support early on, many of them (most notably the Pope!) backed off swiftly at a certain stage. Probably when it became apparent that all was not what it seemed and it was not so much a McScam as a McSewer, imo.

I do agree that the backgrounds of both Kate and Gerry - as outlined in Kate's book - would play a part in the family dynamic which lead to the tragedy. We KNOW from Kate's book that the McCanns (and their friends) don't want to fork out money on babysitters. Whether or not it is true that all the children were indeed left alone during the evenings that fateful week, it is nevertheless on record that Kate used family to babysit and her cleaner to help out once the twins came along. Plus nursery day care for Madeleine. These are all relatively 'budget' childcare options especially when you consider this is a professional couple with three very young children. I think a lot of relationships would be buckling under that kind of pressure and I'm not so sure that family were as helpful as Kate might like to have suggested. We know - from Kate's book - that Gerry's upbringing was pretty spartan by any standards and the older children were 'in loco parentis' which is a pretty mixed bag of tricks I would think.

What I don't understand is that why - when the case was shelved (in the summer of 2008?) the Mcs and Tapas didn't just put their heads down and disappear into obscurity? It was insanity, imo, for them to stick their heads above the parapet and drive forward with their 'ambassadors' for missing children role plus all the other stunts - not least all the legal battles. If they had done this, I think there would have been much less interest in the case.

by Verdi 16.12.15 15:49

@j.rob
I think you've answered your own question in your opening words.

Q: "What I don't understand is that why - when the case was shelved (in the summer of 2008?) the Mcs and Tapas didn't just put their heads down and disappear into obscurity

A: "Their arrogance will be their downfall, imo"

by Verdi 16.12.15 20:40

Hate to be overly critical (snort!) but.. according to Gerry McCann when he checked on the children at 9.something pm on the night of 3rd May he noticed the children's bedroom door was open wider than they left it, he looked in the children - had his proud father moment admiring his beautiful daughter (not the twins!?!) - and left them alone again. Probably nothing but as he places such emphasis on how they left the bedroom door, I would assume he left it as he claimed they usually did.

However .. according to Kate McCann during the Oprah interview, when she checked on the children at approximately 10.00 pm on the night of 3rd May, she also noticed the door was not as they left it when leaving for dinner until for some inexplicable reason the door slam dunked because, she presumes, a strong current of air caused by the open window - which incidentally wasn't open. She apparently assumed it was Matt Oldfield that altered the position of the door when he did the interim check.

Geeez - it's worse than a Brian Rix bedroom farce.

Thank you Hobbs for again drawing attention to the Oprah Winfrey interview, fascinating case study in itself and only two years after Madeleine's disappearance. Anyone out there who still think the McCanns are totally without blame - watch listen and learn. If I didn't know better I'd swear GM was covertly making lerve to Ms Winfrey, after all he appeared to flirting with 'ask the dogs Sandra' didn't he? I haven't reached 'cowering' bit yet, feat. Gerald lounging about looking cock sure of himself but to be getting on with, this I thought to be an example of why the word 'cowering' might have been used with reference to Madeleine..

"She's Cowering In a Wardrobe Or Something" Kate McCann on Oprah - Page 1 83449-madeleine-mccann-libel-trial-delayed-for-a-month

"She's Cowering In a Wardrobe Or Something" Kate McCann on Oprah - Page 1 83449-madeleine-mccann-libel-trial-delayed-for-a-month

by **sharonl** 16.12.15 22:41

Hobs wrote:
We learned that Maddie hid from you in the bushes one night, something that has yet to be explained away.

Sorry, I am going a little off topic here but for ages I have been searching, very unsuccessfully, for an article where Kate says that Madeleine did not like to come in at bedtime and would often run around outside, playing hide and seek, in order to get a little more time. I think that this is the closest that I have got to someone else remembering it.

This could possibly be very significant to the question "what really happened to Madeleine", and I would like to read this article again. If anyone has more information or a link to this, please would you let me have it.

by Verdi 16.12.15 23:36

sharonl wrote:
Hobs wrote:
We learned that Maddie hid from you in the bushes one night, something that has yet to be explained away.

Sorry, I am going a little off topic here but for ages I have been searching, very unsuccessfully, for an article where Kate says that Madeleine did not like to come in at bedtime and would often run around outside, playing hide and seek, in order to get a little more time. I think that this is the closest that I have got to someone else remembering it.

This could possibly be very significant to the question "what really happened to Madeleine", and I would like to read this article again. If anyone has more information or a link to this, please would you let me have it.

I don't recall the particular article you refer to but maybe this helps..

In a further twist, locals now claim that Madeleine did not always settle well. One evening they allege she ran away into the paths between the apartments, hiding for half an hour when it was time for bed.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-474656/Madeleine-missing-hour-did-McCanns-check-children.html

Not sure but I think this may have come from a vague comment GM made in one of his witness statements about Madeleine running off and hiding one day on the way back to their apartment. Haven't time to look at present.

by **Hobs** 17.12.15 1:19

The mccanns statements about the night of may 3rd is more revealing than they think.

In statement analysis it is well known that references to doors open/closing, lights on/off and water washing hands/showering/bathing can all indicate sexual activity has taken place.

It doesn't mean it did, it means that further investigation and questioning needs to be done to learn why such references were included in the subject's statement.

First we have kate and her infamous shower scene and payne turning up.
Note also the large discrepancy in time, she said 30 seconds, he said 30 mins.

I can understand a couple om minutes either way, especially in long conversations.

29 minutes is a major difference in time and I would probe further into what happened.

Kate told us she was showering whilst the children were eating and looking at some books

From her Sept 6th Rog interview

While the children were eating and looking at some books, Kate had a shower which lasted around 5 minutes. After showering, at around 6:30/6:40 p.m. and while she was getting dry, she heard somebody knocking at the balcony door. She wrapped herself in a towel.

Now in her statement to Police

Thursday May 3rd 2007

Kate Marie Healy's statement 04/05/07 @ 14.20pm

Yesterday, after the daily routine, Madeleine and the twins went to bed at around 7.30. They were in their respective beds. The interviewee and her husband stayed in their apartment to relax until 8.30pm. She took a bath, did her make-up and drank a glass of New Zealand wine with her husband.

Now. me being me would be asking the following (I'm nosy like this)

We have kate taking a shower.
We have payne showing up and we effectively have a temporal lacuna of approx 30 mins ( the time difference between kate's claim and payne's claim.
We then have kate taking a bath.

Given that introducing water into a statement can indicate sexual activity taking place.
I wonder if kate and payne got it on and kate then had to have a bath to wash any evidence away?

by Guest 17.12.15 8:45

Where has this water=sex stuff come from? I'm not buying that.

The statement shower/bath contradictions are interesting in their own right.

I don't think anyone was "getting it on" if Madeleine was already dead which is a logical conclusion of the dog alerts.

by woodpecker 17.12.15 10:35

I find 'taking a shower' when you are on your own with 3 small children very odd. Why not wait until Gerry came back and have a relaxed shower? The noise of the shower running particularly if the bathroom door was closed would surely drown the noise of children fighting/calling for mummy etc? Even if you left the door open, you still might not hear the children. You cannot assume because you left the children sitting quietly they will remain that way. The twins were only 2!

It is not credible that she took a shower and a bath within an hour of each action UNLESS of course there was a reason why she had become hot and sweaty after the shower.....

I tend to believe Payne never came to the apartment and they just didn't get their stories straight. His 'visit' was needed to establish that madeleine was alive that evening. There was no shower and she had a bath when Gerry was back to keep an eye on the children. However I don't understand why she mentioned a shower as it wasn't necessary to the story that Payne had called........

by Verdi 17.12.15 12:25

sharonl wrote:
Hobs wrote:
We learned that Maddie hid from you in the bushes one night, something that has yet to be explained away.

Sorry, I am going a little off topic here but for ages I have been searching, very unsuccessfully, for an article where Kate says that Madeleine did not like to come in at bedtime and would often run around outside, playing hide and seek, in order to get a little more time. I think that this is the closest that I have got to someone else remembering it.

This could possibly be very significant to the question "what really happened to Madeleine", and I would like to read this article again. If anyone has more information or a link to this, please would you let me have it.

Eureka - found it!

Gerry McCann witness statement - 10th May 2007

That, between Monday and Wednesday, not knowing the precise date, when they left the residence by the main door, to place the children in the respective creches, MADELEINE left [went] running to the left to the extreme opposite of the residential blocks where they were lodged, playing with the twins. That they had gone down to the furthest point away from those blocks, not knowing exactly how, the three children got into the gardens at the rear [of the blocks]. Then they followed the inside corridor [pathway] at the rear, next to the hedges [fences] up to the street that led to the secondary reception.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

by Non believer 17.12.15 12:52

Verdi wrote: according to Gerry McCann when he checked on the children at 9.something pm on the night of 3rd May he noticed the children's bedroom door was open wider than they left it

Strange he can remember how wide the bedroom door was open but couldn't remember if he went in the front door of the appartment or the back patio door Does this guy think every body is thick or something He said at first it was the front door then changed his mind to the patio door

by Verdi 17.12.15 15:42

Non believer wrote:
Verdi wrote: according to Gerry McCann when he checked on the children at 9.something pm on the night of 3rd May he noticed the children's bedroom door was open wider than they left it

Strange he can remember how wide the bedroom door was open but couldn't remember if he went in the front door of the appartment or the back patio door Does this guy think every body is thick or something He said at first it was the front door then changed his mind to the patio door

Yes, I believe he really does think we're all thick but then - I doubt it ever occurred to him that one day in the future his words would be out there in the public arena - bet he curses Portuguese law for allowing all that incriminating information to be presented before the world.

Talking of doors, I'm sure Hobbs won't object to a slight deviation from topic, reading through GM's statements without exception he says that when leaving the apartment in the daytime, the misses and kids left by way of the patio door whist he left through the front door after locking the patio door from the inside. No doubt they had their reasons for such a curious ritual but I've never seen an explanation as to why they deemed it necessary to exit through separate ends of the apartment - Katie must have found it a bit difficult negociating her way down those treacherous stone steps with gate with three young toddlers in tow - guess it was another instance of Ger just being Ger. They appear to have an obsession with windows and doors don't they. So, apartment locked during the day when they're all out yet they thought it safe to leave three very vulnerable young children alone at night in an unlocked apartment?

Not that I believe the nonsense for a second but if they're going to pave the way for an abductor to enter and steal a single child, leaving no trace of being in the apartment, without waking the twins, snatching one particular child out of the three from a darkened room and not apparently having a rummage about for swag (clearing not a burglar)? Still, as GM said, nothing of value was taken !!!!!!

by **Hobs** 17.12.15 18:43

BlueBag wrote:Where has this water=sex stuff come from? I'm not buying that.

The statement shower/bath contradictions are interesting in their own right.

I don't think anyone was "getting it on" if Madeleine was already dead which is a logical conclusion of the dog alerts.

Hi BlueBag.

It is something that is learned in statement analysis.
it is a common denominator in sex crimes and even murder.
When someone, using the process of free editing tells they washed their hands, they took a shower and towel dried themselves off the question is asked why do they feel the need to include such minutia.
It crops up a lot in sex crimes, sexual abuse/domestic violence and child abuse.
Example a child who had to be reminded to wash his hands after going to the bathroom and then it is noticed he is always washing his hands, can indicate something is going on in the home situation

A recent example which i spotted right away as a red flag, was in relation to the murder of Becky Watts by her step-brother and his girlfriend.
In the police interview with shauna hoare

Hoare described how when they visited the home she usually did the washing up while Matthews took a dog for a walk or did some vacuuming.

She said on this occasion she went to the kitchen and then out into the garden for a cigarette for some 20 minutes.
She said: "I came back in to the kitchen to drink some water.
"I washed my hands.
"I heard the front door slam. I assume Becky was leaving the house.
"I went into the living room and CBeebies was on the telly.

As we learned, Becky was the victim of a sexual homicide and both were involved.

It doesn't always mean sexual activity took place, it does however warrant closer investigation as water crops up in many crimes ( symbolic cleansing /washing away of the crime perhaps)

In child sexual abuse cases, investigators have noted that many times doors opening and closing can indicate a sexual crime ( the door opening is when the abuser arrives and the victim is terrified and the door closing when it is over and the victim feels les stresed.
The same with lights on or off.

Even adults for example suffering from PTSD will mention lights and doors and coverings.

With the mccanns we have water, showering/bathing lights on/off, doors open/closed.
All of which would cause me to ask why the need to introduce this into the statement?
Why it was given such prominence (angle of door) when we had already been told that both gerry and matt had allegedly checked on the children and so the door would appear slightly different?

http://www.itv.com/news/west/2015-10-12/watch-shauna-hoare-calmly-describes-events-to-police/

by **sharonl** 17.12.15 20:28

Verdi wrote:
sharonl wrote:
Hobs wrote:
We learned that Maddie hid from you in the bushes one night, something that has yet to be explained away.

Sorry, I am going a little off topic here but for ages I have been searching, very unsuccessfully, for an article where Kate says that Madeleine did not like to come in at bedtime and would often run around outside, playing hide and seek, in order to get a little more time. I think that this is the closest that I have got to someone else remembering it.

This could possibly be very significant to the question "what really happened to Madeleine", and I would like to read this article again. If anyone has more information or a link to this, please would you let me have it.
Eureka - found it!

Gerry McCann witness statement - 10th May 2007

That, between Monday and Wednesday, not knowing the precise date, when they left the residence by the main door, to place the children in the respective creches, MADELEINE left [went] running to the left to the extreme opposite of the residential blocks where they were lodged, playing with the twins. That they had gone down to the furthest point away from those blocks, not knowing exactly how, the three children got into the gardens at the rear [of the blocks]. Then they followed the inside corridor [pathway] at the rear, next to the hedges [fences] up to the street that led to the secondary reception.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

Thanks Verdi - that's great.

So, Madeleine was in the habit of running off, hiding in the bushes etc. I also a remember Kate McCann stating that Madeleine was difficult to get in at bedtime.

Complete speculation I know but no stone unturned. This has been niggling away at me for ages:

When we consider that there was an argument between Kate and Gerry, a broken shutter, a broken bed, Kates' bruises etc. I just wondered whether this was relevant - imagine all the group at the tapas bar, Kate is desperately trying to get herself ready and Madeleine is playing games with her. Even worse if Gerry says that he was going on ahead, and possibly the aerobics instructor was likely to be there.

Kate said that Gerry upset her by ignoring her on the back one night, Was he also in the habit of ignoring her on the way out?

by Verdi 17.12.15 22:59

sharonl wrote:
Verdi wrote:
sharonl wrote:
Hobs wrote:
We learned that Maddie hid from you in the bushes one night, something that has yet to be explained away.

Sorry, I am going a little off topic here but for ages I have been searching, very unsuccessfully, for an article where Kate says that Madeleine did not like to come in at bedtime and would often run around outside, playing hide and seek, in order to get a little more time. I think that this is the closest that I have got to someone else remembering it.

This could possibly be very significant to the question "what really happened to Madeleine", and I would like to read this article again. If anyone has more information or a link to this, please would you let me have it.
Eureka - found it!

Gerry McCann witness statement - 10th May 2007

That, between Monday and Wednesday, not knowing the precise date, when they left the residence by the main door, to place the children in the respective creches, MADELEINE left [went] running to the left to the extreme opposite of the residential blocks where they were lodged, playing with the twins. That they had gone down to the furthest point away from those blocks, not knowing exactly how, the three children got into the gardens at the rear [of the blocks]. Then they followed the inside corridor [pathway] at the rear, next to the hedges [fences] up to the street that led to the secondary reception.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

Thanks Verdi - that's great.

So, Madeleine was in the habit of running off, hiding in the bushes etc. I also a remember Kate McCann stating that Madeleine was difficult to get in at bedtime.

Complete speculation I know but no stone unturned. This has been niggling away at me for ages:

When we consider that there was an argument between Kate and Gerry, a broken shutter, a broken bed, Kates' bruises etc. I just wondered whether this was relevant - imagine all the group at the tapas bar, Kate is desperately trying to get herself ready and Madeleine is playing games with her. Even worse if Gerry says that he was going on ahead, and possibly the aerobics instructor was likely to be there.

Kate said that Gerry upset her by ignoring her on the back one night, Was he also in the habit of ignoring her on the way out?

Don't know about running off, sounds more like The Great Escape to me. The way I read GM's statement, the twins were with Madeleine on this particular occasion - how old were they at the time, about two years? If memory serves me well, they knocked the Millennium restaurant on the head because it was too far for the twins without a buggy yet here we have them cavorting about the Ocean Club resort faster than the parents can even think.

The way the McCanns explain away the bedtime routine, you'd think a glass of milk a few biscuits and a packet of crisps (thank goodness they didn't mention a pint of lager) worked miracles. Excited children of that age range are seldom that easily controlled at bedtime - I can imagine tantrums abundant interfering with that long awaited adult only time. You know, the adult only time they didn't achieve during the day because the kids were all ensconced in the crèche facilities - eh?

ETA: Wish to hell I never lost the text of 'madeleine' by KATE MCCANN, a novel of epic proportions. Reluctant to purchase even the cheaper paperback as I strongly object to helping fund their lifestyle preferences.