Re: Philomena McCann: "..one greedy, unscrupulous character.."

by aiyoyo 12.08.14 12:49

Dr What wrote:It did, PeterMac.

But not before most of them had taken their slice of the big Fund cake.

I doubt very much they got to smell the pie.
They were dumped because they became too much of a liability.
In lieu of them, skinny Kate was sent to the front line as required, even though she can't string a proper sentence.

by Snifferdog 12.08.14 15:10

Even though she was not fat with a huge pair of knockers. (rephrased from Kate McCann. Sorry, i can it remember the exact words).

by jeanmonroe 12.08.14 15:19

Snifferdog wrote:Even though she was not fat with a huge pair of knockers. (rephrased from Kate McCann. Sorry, i can it remember the exact words).

Kate "believes she is being PERSECUTED because of her APPEARANCE," her mother revealed today. In an extraordinary interview, Susan Healy described how her distraught daughter claimed "if she was HEAVIER—and had BIGGER BREASTS—people would be more SYMPATHETIC."
---------------------------------------------

memo to K McCann AND her mother:

People don't like bigger boobed, heavier, 'LIARS' either!

philomena - Philomena McCann: "..one greedy, unscrupulous character.." - Page 9 Matern10

philomena - Philomena McCann: "..one greedy, unscrupulous character.." - Page 9 Matern10

Hmmm. Now let me............ thinking

NAH! I'm still totally UNSYMPATHETIC towards a negligent parent, who through her own diliberate, and conscious, actions 'lost' one of her three kids.

by Gaggzy 12.08.14 15:28

jeanmonroe wrote:
Snifferdog wrote:Even though she was not fat with a huge pair of knockers. (rephrased from Kate McCann. Sorry, i can it remember the exact words).

Kate "believes she is being PERSECUTED because of her APPEARANCE," her mother revealed today. In an extraordinary interview, Susan Healy described how her distraught daughter claimed "if she was HEAVIER—and had BIGGER BREASTS—people would be more SYMPATHETIC."
---------------------------------------------

memo to K McCann AND her mother:

People don't like bigger boobed, heavier, 'LIARS' either!

I can imagine Philomena McCann lamenting, 'Hark, if only I were a slim, svelte, twiggy-esque size zero. Then everyone would believe that those shutters had been jemmied open; smashed to bits, looking as if they'd been blasted by a dozen sticks of dynamite.'

by Snifferdog 12.08.14 15:31

People also don't like busty overweight child neglecting/abusing women either.

by nglfi 12.08.14 15:40

jeanmonroe wrote:
Snifferdog wrote:Even though she was not fat with a huge pair of knockers. (rephrased from Kate McCann. Sorry, i can it remember the exact words).

Kate "believes she is being PERSECUTED because of her APPEARANCE," her mother revealed today. In an extraordinary interview, Susan Healy described how her distraught daughter claimed "if she was HEAVIER—and had BIGGER BREASTS—people would be more SYMPATHETIC."
---------------------------------------------

What she meant was that attractive people are generally considered more trustworthy, and are generally more successful in their endeavours because they are given more chances by others and tend to do better in interviews for example. I have no idea why that should be the case but I have read psychological studies about this. I believe Kate laments the fact she isn't attractive as it would make her lies more believable/fewer people would question them.

As an example, I personally think Jeremy Bamber is really quite attractive, and whilst common sense and what I've read about the case does suggest to me there's a good chance he's guilty, something about his face makes me feel like he wouldn't do something like that. I don't know why, I just get that feeling. Although it shouldn't be, appearance is everything. Hence the images of Gerry laughing just a few days after Maddie's disappearance will forever stick in people's minds and cannot be erased. Similarly, Kate is right, had she been young, attractive and yes, big breasted, I think the general public may have been less likely to question their version of events (or want to believe them more).

by nglfi 12.08.14 15:48

Article about attractiveness and its links to perceptions of trustworthiness. Sorry if this is straying a bit off topic but I believe this is why Kate made these comments -

http://neuropoly.com/2010/07/11/are-attractive-people-really-more-trustworthy/

by jeanmonroe 12.08.14 15:53

What she meant was that attractive people are generally considered more trustworthy, and are generally more successful in their endeavours because they are given more chances by others and tend to do better in interviews.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for that.

Dosen't 'explain' the great 'love fest' towards serial child abuser, (CURRENT Deputy Prime Minister of UK, NICK 'you're my inspiration and hero, Cyril' CLEGG) 35 stone MP Cyril Smith, of Rochdale, and why he had soooooooo many SYMPATHETIC 'supporters' does it?

Because he was er, 'HEAVIER'?

(he did have BIGGER 'moobs' than K McCann, though!)

Glad i 'get that'!.....................NOT!

by nglfi 12.08.14 16:00

jeanmonroe wrote:What she meant was that attractive people are generally considered more trustworthy, and are generally more successful in their endeavours because they are given more chances by others and tend to do better in interviews.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for that.

That 'explains' the great 'love fest' towards serial child abuser, 35 stone MP Cyril Smith, of Rochdale, and why he had soooooooo many SYMPATHETIC 'supporters'!

Because he was er, 'HEAVIER'

(and he had BIGGER 'moobs' than K McCann!)

Glad i 'get that'!.....................NOT!

I'm not sure there was ever a 'love fest' around Cyril Smith, and if there was I certainly don't want to hear about it! Just because he wasn't prosecuted for his offences it doesn't mean people liked him or thought he was an honest, scrupulous character. There was obviously a cover up culture at that time and for whatever reason he got away with his crimes, but I'm not sure the public perception of him was ever particularly positive.
It is a well known psychological phenomenon that people who are considered more attractive are also considered more trustworthy and successful. I'm not saying it is right or has any logic behind it, but it is what it is. I believe Kate would have wanted to latch on to that if she could, but people don't seem to be amenable to her in that way more than any other, and this obviously grates with her, hence the interview.

ETA both Kate and Gerry seem to have a very good grasp (or did initially) of how to manipulate public opinion. Where they both fell down was their arrogance. The 'wider agenda' for example, was a good idea to lay out and summarise ways of how to get off with the crime, and which elements to draw in from where. It wasn't such a good idea to publicise it however, arrogance strikes again. As has been mentioned previously about Kate, she always had a good awareness of when to take care over her appearance and when to let it go in order to seem the distraught mother. Gerry's 'confusion is good' quote is another example. Get a wealth of information, false or not, get it out there and people will speculate and get further and further away from the truth. This is where I think Kate's comment in the interview (spoken through her mother) comes in - she knows how much it would have helped the pair of them if she had been considered attractive and is pissed off that it isn't the case.

by jeanmonroe 12.08.14 16:09

Let's get this STRAIGHT!

I'll risk a weeks 'ban' for saying this.

NOBODY gives a flying 'fcuk' about K McCann!

IT AIN'T ALL 'ABOUT' HER!

(although she'd love it to be!)

EVERYBODY ONLY CARES ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED TO A DEFENCELESS LITTLE GIRL, LEFT ON HER OWN WITH HER YOUNGER SIBLINGS, WHILST THE SCRAWNY K MCCANN WENT OUT ENJOYING HERSELF WITH HER FRIENDS!

(Who ALSO, LEST WE FORGET, LEFT ALL OF THEIR KIDS, ONE OF WHICH WAS 'SICK', AND ANOTHER WHO HAD 'SOILED' CLOTHING, ALONE IN THEIR APARTMENTS WHILST OUT ENJOYING THEMSELVES WITH THE, SELF CONFESSED, NEGLIGENT MCCANNS!)

BUT HEY HO, WHY LET A 'SICK' KID GET IN THE WAY OF A NICE MEAL OUT WITH ALL OF YOUR OTHER NEGLIGENT FRIENDS!

Ah, 'poor' SCRAWNY Kate...........................pass the sick bucket!

:puke: :puke: :puke:

by **PeterMac** 12.08.14 16:22

Quite.

by Guest 12.08.14 16:26

jeanmonroe wrote:

Hmmm. Now let me............

NAH! I'm still totally UNSYMPATHETIC towards a negligent parent, who through her own diliberate, and conscious, actions 'lost' one of her three kids.

I don't know, something doesn't seem quite right about that photo, I think it's photoshopped. The necklace looks strange.

by jeanmonroe 12.08.14 16:42

Marlie

I don't know, something doesn't seem quite right about that photo,
---------------------------------------------------

Yeah, there IS something not 'quite right' about that photo

Kate McCann is NOT 'GURNING like a gurning champion at a gurning contest,, GRINNING like a Cheshire cat, who got the cream, or LAUGHING like a horse, promoting everything 'KATE' and pe*ing herself laughing, at the plebs and kiddie and OAP 'donators' to her private company, Madeleine's Fund, on Kelly's sofa'!

Yeah, 'photoshopped' indeed!

Only took the 'artist' 5 years and copious amounts of photo shop 'software' to 'whoosh clunk' ALL of her above 'traits'

"Madeleine WHO"?

by nglfi 12.08.14 16:51

jeanmonroe wrote:Let's get this STRAIGHT!

I'll risk a weeks 'ban' for saying this.

NOBODY gives a flying 'fcuk' about K McCann!

IT AIN'T ALL 'ABOUT' HER!

(although she'd love it to be!)

Exactly my point. The pair have tried to make it about themselves from day one, and with no small success. We very rarely, if ever hear anything about Madeleine, the victim. TM have succeeded in making the focus all about them, with national newspapers parading the likes of 'couldn't make love to Gerry' headlines. However, interest in KM is clearly not as high level as she would like it, hence her comments (spoken through her mother) in that interview. I'm not sure if or how I've managed to convey the impression that I in any way feel sorry for Kate as a result of this, on the contrary, I find it highly amusing.

by pauloptix 12.08.14 20:32

jeanmonroe wrote:

5th May 2007.
Philomena says she has spoken to Gerry ''several times'' and she is still recounting the 'abductor through the window' scenario, when she says ''It is obvious that someone, with malicious intent, went through that window and took Madeleine.....''

"Gerry and Kate are in a clear line of sight of their kids" (presumeably 'wearing' their X-Ray vision googles, that can 'see' through the solid brick walls of their apartment to the 'front' kiddies bedroom! OBVIOUSLY!).........Really Phil?
--------------------------------------------------

Hmmmm.

That's NOT what your BROTHER and sister in law, Gerry and Kate McCann, are saying NOW, is it Philomena?

THEY are saying the 'burglator' entered the apartment via the patio door which they, your BROTHER and his wife had, diliberately and consciously, left UNLOCKED.

If the McCanns had tried to claim for missing 'valuables' from an insurance company, they would have been laughed out of the 'office'!

"So, how did the burglars break into your apartment, to 'steal' the 'valuables' you are claiming for, Mr and Mrs McCann?"

"Er, um, erm, 'cough' they didn't ACTUALLY break in, as such, er, um, they entered our apartment through the patio door, we had diliberately and consciously left unlocked whilst we went out of sight to the tapas restaurant"

"Ah"

Lucky they didn't leave anything 'valuable' in the apartment. Phew!

by **PeterMac** 12.08.14 22:52

Was it not she who said "Nothing of value was stolen " ?

by missmar1 12.08.14 23:28

PeterMac wrote:Was it not she who said "Nothing of value was stolen " ?

Didn't Gerry Mccann say they were lucky because they could have taken all three children ? I can't believe that man's choice of words !

Also, as another poster pointed out ( sorry can't remember their name ) how on earth can the Mccann's claim that it " felt safe" to leave their children alone at night in an unlocked apartment ( If they did ) yet I have never read that they also felt it was safe to leave all their valuables in the same unlocked apartment during the day ?
Does anyone know if they locked the apartment during daytime hours when they were all out ?

by jeanmonroe 12.08.14 23:44

missmar1 wrote:
PeterMac wrote:Was it not she who said "Nothing of value was stolen " ?

Didn't Gerry Mccann say they were lucky because they could have taken all three children ? I can't believe that man's choice of words !

Also, as another poster pointed out ( sorry can't remember their name ) how on earth can the Mccann's claim that it " felt safe" to leave their children alone at night in an unlocked apartment ( If they did ) yet I have never read that they also felt it was safe to leave all their valuables in the same unlocked apartment during the day ?
Does anyone know if they locked the apartment during daytime hours when they were all out ?

Oh yes!

On at least one occasion, and there are other examples the McCanns have given themselves, during DAYTIME 'hours', KM AND the kids had to wait patiently outside the LOCKED patio doors whilst GM went around to unlock the front door, with his key, and go through the apartment to UNLOCK the patio door from INSIDE the apartment to let her and the kids IN!

eta: I posted a LONGGGGGG post all about the 'unlocked/locked' doors to apartment 5A during their 'stay'.

Did you know, for instance, that the McCanns left the patio door UNLOCKED every night of their stay, so that 'their friends could check on THEIR kids'? (direct source: G McCann)

However it has since transpired that NONE of their 'friends' EVER 'checked' on their kids, NOT ONCE, during the whole week, EXCEPT the first 'odd' visitation by their friend, MO, on the FATEFUL night!

What an UNLUCKY 'night' he CHOSE to 'volunteer' to 'check' their kids, for the very first time,that week, huh?

If i were 'cynical', i'd 'suspect' HE might have been the 'stage' setter, opening the window, raising the shutter, for KM's later er, 'discovery'!

NO 'danger' of the twins being taken between MO 'check' and KM's 'discovery' because there was a tapas 'friend', either R O'B or JT 'on station' keeping a very beady eye on the open window, raised shutter, in case a passing predatory paedophile was going to 'chance his arm' before 'our' Kate got there.

But , thankfully, i'm not 'cynical' am i?

by Liz Eagles 12.08.14 23:45

PeterMac wrote:Was it not she who said "Nothing of value was stolen " ?

Yip.

Still, Kate's earrings, the watches and mobile phones Clarrie said they weren't wearing/didn't have with them in the Tapas Bar, their passports and cameras were still all there. Goodness knows if they'd gone missing...it might have been described as akin to being overdrawn on your student loan.

by sallypelt 13.08.14 0:30

jeanmonroe wrote:
missmar1 wrote:
PeterMac wrote:Was it not she who said "Nothing of value was stolen " ?

Didn't Gerry Mccann say they were lucky because they could have taken all three children ? I can't believe that man's choice of words !

Also, as another poster pointed out ( sorry can't remember their name ) how on earth can the Mccann's claim that it " felt safe" to leave their children alone at night in an unlocked apartment ( If they did ) yet I have never read that they also felt it was safe to leave all their valuables in the same unlocked apartment during the day ?
Does anyone know if they locked the apartment during daytime hours when they were all out ?

Oh yes!

On at least one occasion, and there are other examples the McCanns have given themselves, during DAYTIME 'hours', KM AND the kids had to wait patiently outside the LOCKED patio doors whilst GM went around to unlock the front door, with his key, and go through the apartment to UNLOCK the patio door from INSIDE the apartment to let her and the kids IN!

eta: I posted a LONGGGGGG post all about the 'unlocked/locked' doors to apartment 5A during their 'stay'.

Did you know, for instance, that the McCanns left the patio door UNLOCKED every night of their stay, so that 'their friends could check on THEIR kids'? (direct source: G McCann)

However it has since transpired that NONE of their 'friends' EVER 'checked' on their kids, NOT ONCE, during the whole week, EXCEPT the first 'odd' visitation by their friend, MO, on the FATEFUL night!

What an UNLUCKY 'night' he CHOSE to 'volunteer' to 'check' their kids, for the very first time,that week, huh?

If i were 'cynical', i'd 'suspect' HE might have been the 'stage' setter, opening the window, raising the shutter, for KM's later er, 'discovery'!

But i'm not 'cynical' am i?

This is taken from Rachel Mampilly's PJ statement. She's talking about her husband:

"Her husband went into the main room and "peeped" into one of the bedrooms where the couple's three children were sleeping. He didn't switch any lights on. He could see the twins in their beds. The bedroom door was half-open. It was only later that he realised this was strange.

Why, oh why would Rachel Mampilly be talking about what her husband did on his visit? She didn't go with him. This just doesn't make sense. The only person who can say what he did was MO himself.
Also, why did he think it strange that the bedroom door was half-open? And is it just another one of those coincidences that RM's statement above are the EXACT words used by Kate McCann herself, in her slammed door and "whooshed curtains" footage?

by jeanmonroe 13.08.14 0:49

And the VERY strange, if Madeleine 'had been bumped on her head and resuscitation', 'tale' R O blurted out'

I personally 'think' she said THAT as a coded message to McCanns.

"Drop Matt in it, (he, Matt, would/should have been the LAST person to 'see' Madeleine, before 'abduction' not me, says Gerry) and the s*it WILL hit the fan!'

by jeanmonroe 13.08.14 1:07

Speaking of similar/exact words used by the T9

GM statement 4th May 2007. (having READ the deed it is confirmed, ratified and signed by GM)
It is emphasised that one of the members of the group, Jane, at about 21.10 - 21.15 when she was going to her apartment to check on her children, she saw from the back, at a distance of about 50 metres, on the road bordering the club, an individual carrying a child, wearing pyjamas, Jane will be able to clarify this situation.

KM statement 4th May 2007. (having READ the deed it is confirmed, ratified, and signed by KM)
Later, a member of the group, Russell's partner Jane, when she went to her apartment to see her children at around 9.15pm, saw from the back [rear] about 50 metres away, on the perimeter road of the club, a long-haired person, in what she thinks were jeans, with a child in his arms and walking very quickly. But she is better able to tell you about that herself.

BOTH McCanns SAY the 'distance' Jane 'saw' the 'individual/person' from was 'about 50 (FIFTY) METRES'!

'Eagle eyed' Jane then, being able to give such a detailed description, FROM ABOUT 50 (FIFTY) METRES, of the 'abductor' clothing even down to his ZIPPED, not buttoned, up jacket, although she never actually SAW the 'abductor' FRONT on FROM ABOUT 50 (FIFTY) METRES DISTANCE.

As Gerry McCann later said, "putting these facts together about the sighting of the man (FROM about 50 (fifty) METRES winkwink

) carrying the child AND THE DETAIL OF THAT, as seen by our friend, Jane Tanner. If Jane hadn't seen him, she literally would have been plucked from thin air"

"Abra, abra, cadabra. ABRACADABRA! laughat

eta: "Jane 'saw' a long-haired person, with a child in his arms, walking very quickly" says KM

Kinda blows SHORT CROPPED HAIRED 'Smithman' sighting to 'smithereens' (sic) dosen't it?

by sallypelt 13.08.14 1:20

jeanmonroe wrote:Speaking of similar/exact words used by the T9

GM statement 4th May 2007.
It is emphasised that one of the members of the group, Jane, at about 21.10 - 21.15 when she was going to her apartment to check on her children, she saw from the back, at a distance of about 50 metres, on the road bordering the club, an individual carrying a child, wearing pyjamas, Jane will be able to clarify this situation.

KM statement 4th May 2007.
Later, a member of the group, Russell's partner Jane, when she went to her apartment to see her children at around 9.15pm, saw from the back [rear] about 50 metres away, on the perimeter road of the club, a long-haired person, in what she thinks were jeans, with a child in his arms and walking very quickly. But she is better able to tell you about that herself.

BOTH SAY the 'distance' Jane 'saw' the 'individual/person' from was 50 (FIFTY) METRES!

'Eagle eyed' Jane then, being able to give such a detailed description of the 'abductor' clothing even down to his ZIPPED, not buttoned, up jacket, although she never actually SAW the 'abductor' FRONT on.

As Gerry McCann later said, "if Jane hadn't seen the 'abduction' it would be like Madeleine had just vanished into thin air'

eta: "a long-haired person" says KM

Kinda blows SHORT CROPPED HAIRED 'Smithman' sighting to 'smithereens' (sic) dosen't it?

This is also from Rachel Mampilly's statement of the 4.5.07:

" After placing their orders, at around 9.15pm, Gerry McCann went to check, only his apartment He was held up for nearly 10 minutes because, he said, he had been chatting with Jes about tennis. Today there was a tournament which they both had to compete in. During Gerry's absence, the waiters started to bring the food. Before Gerry arrived Jane Michelle Tanner also left [absented herself] having gone to see her apartment. A little later Jane arrived".

Again, I find this unbelievable. If Gerry left around 9:15 and returned around 9:25, why was Kate about to go do her check? Gerry McCann had only just returned.

The more one goes over the files, the more blatant the inconsistencies. And where they same the same, it's word for word.

by jeanmonroe 13.08.14 1:50

Also J Tanner knew, not guessed, she KNEW, GM had DONE his check, when she saw him chatting to JW!

EVEN though she neither saw him entering or leaving apartment 5A because she was AT the tapas restaurant!

Maybe GM had been chatting to his tennis buddy JW, outside gateway to 5A, all along, and hadn't done his check by the time JT saw them.

But she knew, not guessed, she just KNEW, GM had ALREADY done his check and was on his way BACK to the tapas restaurant!

Perhaps we should add, to JT's 'skill set' .....'PSYCHIC' JANE, as well as 'EAGLE EYED' JANE!

by Gaggzy 14.08.14 2:27

Deleted by Admin

Log in for more topics