The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.


Jill Havern
Forum owner

The Shutters

Page 7 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Guest on 13.01.12 9:14

@beejay wrote:The straight answer is I don't know, I have an open mind. Like many people who have intermittently followed the case I have wavered from one theory to another but I have never managed to convince myself that there is a synopsis out there that fits all the circumstances.

What I do have is a set of beliefs on one side and some areas that I discount on the other. I do believe, therefore, that the children were left alone while the parents went out each night and that they exaggerated the checks.
Where is the physical proof that any child was left alone?
I think they panicked when something happened to Madeleine and spun a tale to disguise the fact that they were out partying when they should have been looking after their tots.
There is no hard evidence of anything happening in 5a, only that at some point a dead body and blood was found on the same spot behind a sofa that was fairly tight up against a wall.
I reckon there is a very good chance that all the children were systematically sedated so the children would not wake up and spoil their adult time - which is another element in the glue that cemented them together.
This cannot be correct, as a child was heard crying in 5a for well over and hour and a half on the 1st.
Their conflicting and ever-changing testimonies are a product of this spin, it's not easy to tell lies as part of a group and it's human nature to embellish a lie so some of them kept digging bigger holes. They attempted to reduce the time available for whatever happened to Madeleine to a minimum so it would look like they were being responsible and were simply unfortunate. There are far to many indications that something happened to Madeleine before the 3rd. In the process they built a schedule full of holes that we have all picked to pieces.

I don't believe that there was any planning involved in Madeleine's disappearance. It just happened.
As said by someone who wishes everyone to believe she was abducted.
I don't subscribe to the view that they were assisted in covering up her disappearance through friends in high places or a secret society. They just happened to be photogenic, sarcastic middle class, professionals and part of the middle England that produced good copy for the readership of our useless press.

I think that the McCanns know a hell of a lot more about what happened to Madeleine than they have revealed. I also think they are nasty, vindictive and calculating but they are not murderers. I reckon Amaral would have found the truth if he had been allowed more time and they were saved when they were allowed to fly home because politically, it was easier for the case to be dropped. Easier for who? Not Portugal or the Portuguese Police. Easier for Gordon Brown, quite possibly, which is why he and Jacqui Smith could not wait to visit Leicestershire Police station as soon as they got home.
If someone can fill in the gaps I would be eternally grateful but I doubt we will ever know the real truth.
beejay, no amount of filling in the gaps will do any good. You are here to promote the abduction line, yet you have nothing to back that up. Perhaps it is you who should be telling us why we should believe "it just happened", "becuase they are photogenic"
I just hope that enough emerges to discredit them so they do not continue their relentless march to sainthood.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by beejay on 13.01.12 9:21

@jd wrote:
deejay wrote: Rainbow, you are entitled to your opinion but no, I don't believe in conspiracy theories. The McCanns have played the system extremely well and as I said earlier, they have reached iconic celebrity status and can get away with things. For you to be right and they are being "protected" would have to involve the entire press corps for starters which I do believe is improbable. With friends like C-R no-one is going to print allegations about Kate telling lies under oath but that doesn't mean there is a secret society behind them and personally I don't buy that.

I agree with you here to a certain extent, yes they have played the system well (with a big helping hand from others guiding them) and they have reached that status to get away with things. But considering they literally have every one in a position of power pandering at their feet & to their every whim when you only have to read the facts & complete contradictions to their story to see clearly and logically they are lying, then yes they are being 'protected'...why would these people in position of power behave like they do otherwise

As for the press, all the reporters and the like are dead scared of their own careers and livelihoods to earn money to pay the rent and food for their families, so they may not be 'part of' the protection but their grave fears means they will corporate.

The same stories that appeared in the British press were also in the Portuguese press but the mccanns never once tried to sue the Portuguese press, why?....because in the UK they could sue for 10 x 100,000's but in Portugual the same would only gain them a mere £3000. The point being apart from the obvious financially gain, if they are truly this upset what is in the press then they would go for both not just the UK but they didn't do this, they went for the money as they always do....they never behave nor take action with the distress that they bleat to the UK media they are under.....follow the money trail

All good points jd, but I truly don't believe that any planning went into all this - it just happened, or rather something happened to Madeleine. In the aftermath, their story resonated with the British public receiving 24/7 wall-to-wall coverage and it became easy for the xenophobic press & Sky News to paint the Portuguese police as lazy, incompetent fools while elevating a stereotypical English Rose & her stiff upper-lipped partner to instant celebrities. The likes of Richard Branson, David Beckham, Cristiano Ronaldo, even the Pope flocked to their side for a photo-opportunity and a wall of money flowed in from the sympathetic British public. They quickly became untouchable.

I don't think that they were initially motivated by money - it was fear of discovery that influenced their every move and a support network did build around them but again, to my mind this was through self-interest and professional connections fed from the slush fund rather than any insidious secret societies.


beejay

Posts : 32
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-12
Location : Liverpool

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by jd on 13.01.12 10:07

@beejay wrote:

All good points jd, but I truly don't believe that any planning went into all this - it just happened, or rather something happened to Madeleine. In the aftermath, their story resonated with the British public receiving 24/7 wall-to-wall coverage and it became easy for the xenophobic press & Sky News to paint the Portuguese police as lazy, incompetent fools while elevating a stereotypical English Rose & her stiff upper-lipped partner to instant celebrities. The likes of Richard Branson, David Beckham, Cristiano Ronaldo, even the Pope flocked to their side for a photo-opportunity and a wall of money flowed in from the sympathetic British public. They quickly became untouchable.

I don't think that they were initially motivated by money - it was fear of discovery that influenced their every move and a support network did build around them but again, to my mind this was through self-interest and professional connections fed from the slush fund rather than any insidious secret societies.

Yes I would agree with you that the scale this magnified to, especially with the money, wasn't the motivation from the start and it was by chance how big with the public interest it became, and just got bigger. The coverup & fairytale was certainly planned obviously but for different reasons imo, but soon as they realised the money that could be made, boy did they jump on the bandwagon!!

____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare

jd

Posts : 4152
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by beejay on 13.01.12 10:09

Stella wrote:
@beejay wrote:The straight answer is I don't know, I have an open mind. Like many people who have intermittently followed the case I have wavered from one theory to another but I have never managed to convince myself that there is a synopsis out there that fits all the circumstances.

What I do have is a set of beliefs on one side and some areas that I discount on the other. I do believe, therefore, that the children were left alone while the parents went out each night and that they exaggerated the checks.
Where is the physical proof that any child was left alone? Where is the proof that they were not?
I think they panicked when something happened to Madeleine and spun a tale to disguise the fact that they were out partying when they should have been looking after their tots.
There is no hard evidence of anything happening in 5a, only that at some point a dead body and blood was found on the same spot behind a sofa that was fairly tight up against a wall. How does this conflict with my sentence?
I reckon there is a very good chance that all the children were systematically sedated so the children would not wake up and spoil their adult time - which is another element in the glue that cemented them together.
This cannot be correct, as a child was heard crying in 5a for well over and hour and a half on the 1st. Well that suggests the children were left alone! It may have been that the sedative was not strong enough, Madeleine woke up and the following night the dose was increased...
Their conflicting and ever-changing testimonies are a product of this spin, it's not easy to tell lies as part of a group and it's human nature to embellish a lie so some of them kept digging bigger holes. They attempted to reduce the time available for whatever happened to Madeleine to a minimum so it would look like they were being responsible and were simply unfortunate. There are far to many indications that something happened to Madeleine before the 3rd. With respect, that is your theory but it is not one that I agree with. In the process they built a schedule full of holes that we have all picked to pieces.

I don't believe that there was any planning involved in Madeleine's disappearance. It just happened.
As said by someone who wishes everyone to believe she was abducted. I'm sorry but when have I said that? I'm not forcing my views on anyone - I said that I don't know what happened to Madeleine.
I don't subscribe to the view that they were assisted in covering up her disappearance through friends in high places or a secret society. They just happened to be photogenic, sarcastic middle class, professionals and part of the middle England that produced good copy for the readership of our useless press.

I think that the McCanns know a hell of a lot more about what happened to Madeleine than they have revealed. I also think they are nasty, vindictive and calculating but they are not murderers. I reckon Amaral would have found the truth if he had been allowed more time and they were saved when they were allowed to fly home because politically, it was easier for the case to be dropped. Easier for who? Not Portugal or the Portuguese Police. Easier for Gordon Brown, quite possibly, which is why he and Jacqui Smith could not wait to visit Leicestershire Police station as soon as they got home. I have answered this at length - in my opinion their instant celebrity status transcended the investigation and once they were out of the country no-one in authority had the will to bring them back.
If someone can fill in the gaps I would be eternally grateful but I doubt we will ever know the real truth.
beejay, no amount of filling in the gaps will do any good. You are here to promote the abduction line, yet you have nothing to back that up. Perhaps it is you who should be telling us why we should believe "it just happened", "becuase they are photogenic" Stella, that's very unfair. Again, where have I promoted the abduction line?
I just hope that enough emerges to discredit them so they do not continue their relentless march to sainthood.

Look, if that's the way you feel I will log off and leave you to it. I didn't expect such a hostile response, we are all trying to find the truth.

beejay

Posts : 32
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-12
Location : Liverpool

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Guest on 13.01.12 10:21

@beejay wrote:
Stella wrote:
@beejay wrote:The straight answer is I don't know, I have an open mind. Like many people who have intermittently followed the case I have wavered from one theory to another but I have never managed to convince myself that there is a synopsis out there that fits all the circumstances.

What I do have is a set of beliefs on one side and some areas that I discount on the other. I do believe, therefore, that the children were left alone while the parents went out each night and that they exaggerated the checks.
Where is the physical proof that any child was left alone? Where is the proof that they were not?
I think they panicked when something happened to Madeleine and spun a tale to disguise the fact that they were out partying when they should have been looking after their tots.
There is no hard evidence of anything happening in 5a, only that at some point a dead body and blood was found on the same spot behind a sofa that was fairly tight up against a wall. How does this conflict with my sentence?
I reckon there is a very good chance that all the children were systematically sedated so the children would not wake up and spoil their adult time - which is another element in the glue that cemented them together.
This cannot be correct, as a child was heard crying in 5a for well over and hour and a half on the 1st. Well that suggests the children were left alone! It may have been that the sedative was not strong enough, Madeleine woke up and the following night the dose was increased...
Their conflicting and ever-changing testimonies are a product of this spin, it's not easy to tell lies as part of a group and it's human nature to embellish a lie so some of them kept digging bigger holes. They attempted to reduce the time available for whatever happened to Madeleine to a minimum so it would look like they were being responsible and were simply unfortunate. There are far to many indications that something happened to Madeleine before the 3rd. With respect, that is your theory but it is not one that I agree with. In the process they built a schedule full of holes that we have all picked to pieces.

I don't believe that there was any planning involved in Madeleine's disappearance. It just happened.
As said by someone who wishes everyone to believe she was abducted. I'm sorry but when have I said that? I'm not forcing my views on anyone - I said that I don't know what happened to Madeleine.
I don't subscribe to the view that they were assisted in covering up her disappearance through friends in high places or a secret society. They just happened to be photogenic, sarcastic middle class, professionals and part of the middle England that produced good copy for the readership of our useless press.

I think that the McCanns know a hell of a lot more about what happened to Madeleine than they have revealed. I also think they are nasty, vindictive and calculating but they are not murderers. I reckon Amaral would have found the truth if he had been allowed more time and they were saved when they were allowed to fly home because politically, it was easier for the case to be dropped. Easier for who? Not Portugal or the Portuguese Police. Easier for Gordon Brown, quite possibly, which is why he and Jacqui Smith could not wait to visit Leicestershire Police station as soon as they got home. I have answered this at length - in my opinion their instant celebrity status transcended the investigation and once they were out of the country no-one in authority had the will to bring them back.
If someone can fill in the gaps I would be eternally grateful but I doubt we will ever know the real truth.
beejay, no amount of filling in the gaps will do any good. You are here to promote the abduction line, yet you have nothing to back that up. Perhaps it is you who should be telling us why we should believe "it just happened", "becuase they are photogenic" Stella, that's very unfair. Again, where have I promoted the abduction line?
I just hope that enough emerges to discredit them so they do not continue their relentless march to sainthood.

Look, if that's the way you feel I will log off and leave you to it. I didn't expect such a hostile response, we are all trying to find the truth.
This forum is all about helping Madeleine. Anyone who thinks what happened to her was as a result of being "photogenic" will have no other opinion, other than to support the abduction line, regardless of what else you have written.

Very soon we are going to be entering into very busy phase and we will not have the time to deal with individuals who are quite clearly not here to help Madeleine. Perhaps you would be better off on one of the other websites that entertains your "photogenic" theories.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by beejay on 13.01.12 10:53

Stella,

I'm gobsmacked by your attitude. The strapline on this forum reads : Why not join our forum and help search for the truth?

Looks like you are more interested in closing down the debate, so that everyone agrees with you.

If this is what the other moderators want, so be it. But please read all that I have posted first - where have I promoted the abduction line? And I have not relied wholly on the supposition that they are photogenic - my essential point is that the media fell hook line & sinker for their story.

I was really hoping that my contribution would spark off a debate and I was keen to avoid dogmatic statements that may invoke an aggressive response. Perhaps I was wrong but I certainly meant no offence.



beejay

Posts : 32
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-12
Location : Liverpool

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Miraflores on 13.01.12 11:00

I don't think that beejay mentions Madeleine being photogenic - I think he was referring to Kate. I suppose that might have been said - blonde, slim etc, hence why the press latched onto her.

I tend to think the same as him - that the children were sedated, and that something went wrong with Madeleine, although I think it happened the night before and they spent the Thursday formulating the cover up and cleaning.

Miraflores

Posts : 845
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by beejay on 13.01.12 11:03

@Miraflores wrote:I don't think that beejay mentions Madeleine being photogenic - I think he was referring to Kate. I suppose that might have been said - blonde, slim etc, hence why the press latched onto her.

I tend to think the same as him - that the children were sedated, and that something went wrong with Madeleine, although I think it happened the night before and they spent the Thursday formulating the cover up and cleaning.

That's exactly what I meant - Kate & Gerry were media darlings

beejay

Posts : 32
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-12
Location : Liverpool

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Guest on 13.01.12 11:10

@beejay wrote:The straight answer is I don't know, I have an open mind. Like many people who have intermittently followed the case I have wavered from one theory to another but I have never managed to convince myself that there is a synopsis out there that fits all the circumstances.

What I do have is a set of beliefs on one side and some areas that I discount on the other. I do believe, therefore, that the children were left alone while the parents went out each night and that they exaggerated the checks. I think they panicked when something happened to Madeleine and spun a tale to disguise the fact that they were out partying when they should have been looking after their tots. I reckon there is a very good chance that all the children were systematically sedated so the children would not wake up and spoil their adult time - which is another element in the glue that cemented them together. Their conflicting and ever-changing testimonies are a product of this spin, it's not easy to tell lies as part of a group and it's human nature to embellish a lie so some of them kept digging bigger holes. They attempted to reduce the time available for whatever happened to Madeleine to a minimum so it would look like they were being responsible and were simply unfortunate. In the process they built a schedule full of holes that we have all picked to pieces.

I don't believe that there was any planning involved in Madeleine's disappearance. It just happened. I don't subscribe to the view that they were assisted in covering up her disappearance through friends in high places or a secret society. They just happened to be photogenic, middle class, professionals and part of the middle England that produced good copy for the readership of our useless press.

I think that the McCanns know a hell of a lot more about what happened to Madeleine than they have revealed. I also think they are nasty, vindictive and calculating but they are not murderers. I reckon Amaral would have found the truth if he had been allowed more time and they were saved when they were allowed to fly home because politically, it was easier for the case to be dropped.

If someone can fill in the gaps I would be eternally grateful but I doubt we will ever know the real truth. I just hope that enough emerges to discredit them so they do not continue their relentless march to sainthood.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Guest on 13.01.12 11:16

@beejay wrote:Stella,

I'm gobsmacked by your attitude. The strapline on this forum reads : Why not join our forum and help search for the truth?

Looks like you are more interested in closing down the debate, so that everyone agrees with you.

If this is what the other moderators want, so be it. But please read all that I have posted first - where have I promoted the abduction line? And I have not relied wholly on the supposition that they are photogenic - my essential point is that the media fell hook line & sinker for their story.

I was really hoping that my contribution would spark off a debate and I was keen to avoid dogmatic statements that may invoke an aggressive response. Perhaps I was wrong but I certainly meant no offence.
Sending you a pm, to free up the forum.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by pennylane on 13.01.12 11:39

@Miraflores wrote:I don't think that beejay mentions Madeleine being photogenic - I think he was referring to Kate. I suppose that might have been said - blonde, slim etc, hence why the press latched onto her.

I tend to think the same as him - that the children were sedated, and that something went wrong with Madeleine, although I think it happened the night before and they spent the Thursday formulating the cover up and cleaning.

Ditto Miraflores. I also believe the crying episode resulted in them upping her dosage, and that something happened on the night of the 2nd, and the interim time was spent formulating their plans, which (imo) Wilkins and the Smiths almost totally scuppered, causing a great deal of angst to those involved. My own feeling is that they do have friends in high places that helped them evade justice, hence Clarence Mitchell's extraordinary efforts to help spin away the rapidly emerging, wholly damaging, truth that would have hung the pair out to dry!

pennylane

Posts : 2529
Reputation : 1189
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Guest on 13.01.12 11:47

Just a polite little reminder now folks roses this thread is dedicated to discussions on the shutters.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by PeterMac on 13.01.12 12:38

@pennylane wrote:SNIP... hence Clarence Mitchell's extraordinary efforts to help spin away the rapidly emerging, wholly damaging, truth that would have hung the pair out to dry!
Which is going to make his position very interesting if the truth ever does come out. He must have known what he was doing, and realised that by so doing he became an accessory - under English law triable as a principal, or at the very least for "assisting offender"

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

beejay, seems I have unintentionally begun trouble. sorry

Post by russiandoll on 13.01.12 14:56

Beejay, let me please say again that I did not mean to challenge you about a belief in abduction in my response to your post. Nowhere have you ever mentioned it, but as you appeared to have an extremely open mind, I wondered if, at the back of that mind, abduction lurked as a possible theory, as you did not state any opinion about what probably happened, other than that a cover up took place and that something quite probably happened to Maddie as a result of parental neglect, being left alone and not checked.
There are many who disbelieve the McCanns who also believe this, you do not go as far as stating an accident happened [e.g. a fall]. And you are not alone in thinking over- sedation might have played a part.
What you do believe wholeheartedly is that the parents staged a cover up.
There are many differing opinions on what went on and why a cover up was needed; we need to remember that the murk and doubt and conflicting theories result from the actions of this couple. Some believe in an accident, with different theories as to when exactly, some believe in premeditation, some in a substitute child being checked in to the creche, others see strong suggestions of paedophilia, masonic involvement, political intrigue.

You are entitled to your theories. I see no attempt on your part to argue the case for abduction, so I am very sorry that by asking you if, as a result of your open mind, did you believe this could have happened, I seem to have created problems for you.

p.s. I do not think you meant at all that Madeleine's being photogenic had anything to do with what happened. Your mentioning photogenic professionals was surely that you believed this all helped with the way the parents were treated by the media.

We are all here to debate the numerous points this case has raised. Much as I dislike emoticons, because a tone of voice is invisible, if in future I ask a question like the one I posed you, I will make sure that you and everyone else here does not misconstrue my motivation...and include a face like this one [ and hope it does not add to misunderstandings!]


____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Guest on 13.01.12 15:18

russiandoll thanks for that, but can I please ask everyone in future to use the pm facility to sort out any misunderstandings, or to convey personal feelings.

We really need to keep the threads on topic please.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

of course stella

Post by russiandoll on 13.01.12 15:53

still getting used to how these forums work, never been on one until now. As I thought I had inadvertently caused a problem not simply between beejay and myself, but between beejay and a few others, it got a public oops moment !
and now let's get back to those darned shutters.


____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Invinoveritas on 16.01.12 18:46

I've posted these PJ photos to show up the discrepancies:

The first ones are from the initial photos taken in the early hours of the 4th/May between 01.00 and 03.30/04.00:



there are in this picture two pink cuddle toys and in the following photo one can see the third:in the corner at the head of the bed beneath the window



we then move on to the afternoon of the 4th and then, surprise, surprise! the cuddle cats have gone!:



so, although the twins had been removed from their cots, their cuddle cats were still there and were removed at a later time, this is surely tampering with evidence.

comments welcome

____________________
"A voyage of discovery is not just seeing new sights - it is seeing familiar sights with new eyes." Proust

Invinoveritas

Posts : 374
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-13
Location : Nowereland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Guest on 17.01.12 8:03

I have said the exact same thing since the pictures have been released Invinoveritas. In paticular, to the pair of what looks like beige trousers on the parents bed, that also disappears between photo shoots.


The Whole apartment should have been completely sealed off as soon as the GNR arrived. But interference from the British Ambassador prevented clothing being removed by forensics and many items returned to the McCann's on request.


Political interference within the first few hours, what does that tell you?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Praia on 17.01.12 14:26

The parents were allowed to remove things the twins needed, so that explains toys. They were being pressed to treat them with kid gloves from the off.

Praia

Posts : 392
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-12-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Guest on 17.01.12 14:34

You see, this is one area I think no one should have been allowed to remove anything. Especially when in 85% of all missing children cases under the age of 5, it usually has something to do with the parents themselves or someone close to them. I hope things change for future cases.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Praia on 17.01.12 14:38

Ditto. But go back to the British Ambassador in Lisbon, what Sr Amaral said re. calls to the chief in Faro within a few hours.... crazy stuff.

Praia

Posts : 392
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-12-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Guest on 17.01.12 14:46

That changed everything and was where the interference started. Not good, but what could they do?

At least we had the first set of photographs. Thank heavens for small mercies eh!!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by C.Edwards on 14.02.12 15:47

Just to bring you up to date on another "you thought it had been put to bed but around it comes like a stuck record once more" subject with the shutters...

Due to a heated debate I was having on the Amazon discussion forum, I ended up being subjected to JATYK forum scrutiny as I was rattling their cage obviously.

Here are some gems to add to the pro excuse list on the shutters:

bb herself:
Yesterday at 21.16 the Portimao DIC received a phone call from a
security officer who worked for the OC to say that a few minutes ago
somebody had forced up the shutters of the window of the bedroom
Madeleine had disappeared from. The undersigned, together with two of
his colleagues went to the scene, where they saw the shutter was hanging
obliquely in front of the window and noted that it had been effectively
forced open from the outside. However, there were no signs of anyone
trying to breach the window.

- These facts were reported by the security guard.

-
The guard said that the incident happened between 21.00 and 21.05, when
he was making his 21.00 round of the block containing Apartment 5 A and
then walked down the die of 5 A, down the road to the Baptista
supermarket and then returned up the same road, returning to the
surroundings of Apartment 5 A and saw that in that short space of time,
someone who he cannot identify as he saw nobody around, had approached
the window and forced the shutters. At about 21.06 he alerted reception
and the GNR.


So, persons unknown managed to force the shutters WHEN THE PREMISES WERE BEING GUARDED.
(er, not quite the same as one man doing it when at least two men are involved and it results in noticeably damaged shutters and the guard was away at the time)

And then because I mentioned that GM had managed to lift the shutters according to his testimony when Dianne and Fiona hadn't, we get:
bb:
So, why is it a matter of record in the police files that they can be
forced? Why do the crime scene photos show them open, exactly as Gerry
McCann described?

Did no-one tell that forker that fit men tend to be better at lifting things than women?

Did no-one tell that forker that the PJ had not the slightest interest in the shutters because they knew they could be lifted?

Silly forker.

Sabot:
Identical shutters on a house down the road from me were forced up and
no one heard a thing in a village that is as quiet as the grave at
night, and often during the day.

bb:
It's odd the way the forkers obsess on those shutters, yet ignore what is recorded about them in the police files, Sabot.

Well, the fact that they so readily parrot any old rubbish, as long as it is anti-McCann, is rather telling, Jean Pierre.

But
what really gets me is this business of them choosing third-hand
hearsay in tabloids over what is a matter of record in the police files.

Brown
made a fool of herself yesterday; the Amazon forkers are currently
making idiots of themselves because they haven't bothered to read the
police files.

I wish I knew why the last thing they ever go seeking is the truth.

bb:
That man was in the area specifically as a guard, at about 9 at night,
when the shutters were forced - and the first thing he knew was when he
actually saw them.

So much for them making enough noise to wake the dead.

bb:
4. It was stated by Silvia Batista that on 20-09-2007, during
the morning, three reporters from Sky News, two men and a woman, were
seen on the patio of apartment 5 A and that they had forced the external blind to the bedroom that Madeleine had disappeared from,
probably with the intention of filming inside, and she told them to
leave. But she said that yesterday 25-09-2007 a security guard was asked
to come to the same apartment as there was a group of three journalists
- two Spanish men and a woman, who had set up cameras on the patio next
to Apartment 5 A which was occupied at the time. Their identification
was not noted, but given the fact they had filming equipment, they were
assumed to be reporters


Then the shutters were later raised when the building was being guarded.

I
think we can see why the PJ weren't in the least interested in hearsay
about shutters - they knew they could be raised from the outside.

bb: (responding to question about what use are security shutters if they can be opened from the outside)
Don't know, but 5a clearly had them - and they DON'T make enough noise to alert the security guy guarding the premises.

Maybe they are OK for keeping light out, but little more use than bog-standard shutters for security?


Sadie:
Oh and I have a PT friend who has shotters like these and tells me that
they can readily be raised from the outside without any force. Seems
they are designed that way.

So there we have it. All we know about the shutters is wrong. Courtesy of the JATYK coven.

C.Edwards

Posts : 144
Reputation : 9
Join date : 2011-05-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Guest on 14.02.12 16:21

@C.Edwards wrote:Just to bring you up to date on another "you thought it had been put to bed but around it comes like a stuck record once more" subject with the shutters...

I can't be dealing with anything that comes out of the cess pit.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Shutters

Post by Guest on 14.02.12 16:25

How thoughtful of you to post that up C Edwards. winkwink

All that waffle, so why did Clarence Mitchell have to admit there was no break in.


McCann family reverse story over break-in 'evidence' - Irish Independent
By Shane Hickey
Thursday October 25 2007



Note: On Martin Brunt's documentary 'The Mystery of Madeleine McCann, aired on 24 December 2007, Prof David Barclay, one of Britain's top forensic consultants said: "I think it's impossible for somebody to get in and out, through that window without leaving a forensic trace. Apart from anything else, the window sills in that area are covered in green lichen. The minute you try and scrape over the window sills you would have left marks and we know that the scenes of crime lady, the next morning, was looking for exactly that."

Interestingly, Clarence Mitchell's statement about the McCanns reversal of their 'break in' story, came one week after Dispatches aired the documentary 'Searching For Madeleine' on 18 October 2007. In that documentary, it was effectively proved that there was no way anybody could break into the apartment and leave no forensic trace or damage to the lightweight aluminium shutters, which are covered with a fine coating of polyurethane paint which marks extremely easily.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id21.html


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Page 7 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum