Curtains washed

by Guest 12.09.11 21:30

oke, thank you for that link to Joana Morais article. I put this for myself under the heading "maybe true" because it is apparently not in the police files as evidence?
Don't want to be difficult, but it is not the same as proof.
If it is really true, I am officially convinced of their guilt. No one washes curtains on a one week holiday, and if it was after the 3th it is still unbelievable that Kate would make time for or even think about such a nasty domestic chore when her child has vanished..

by Guest 18.09.11 9:37

I've just noticed that one of the questions scrolling along the top of the portal page is why 2006 is showing on some pages of the online shop. There are some postings on page 2 of this topic which explain this. For once, to paraphrase you know who, there is an innocent explanation for everything that's found!

by russiandoll 27.09.11 19:45

apologies, cannot recall where I read the following but there was some discussion relating to how the curtains at the children's bedroom window could have made a " whoosh" given their weight and position re the bed under the window. The reply was that the curtains referred to by Kate were the sill length sheer curtains.
While I seem to recall having seen floor length sheers at patio doors presumably for privacy when you had the main curtains open to allow in light.... I do not recall ever having seen short sheers in the childrens room. It was dexcribed as far as I can remember as having blinds and a shutter......why would there need to be sheer curtains as well as blinds?
Did Kate ever say which of 2 sets of curtains went whooooosh as I think there was 1 pr and I dont see how they flew up in the way she described

by **tigger** 27.09.11 20:01

http://mccannfiles.com/id155.html
Sorry it doesn't jump to the page I want. Just run down the list till PJ files photographs 5a. But I'm surprised, I was under the impression that she slept under the window which seems to be on the other side of the room? I must have that wrong?

by russiandoll 27.09.11 20:11

stated for the record in a few places i think that the single bed opp window was maddies bed.
thus making the abduction even less likely, stumbling around 2 cots in the dark before reaching the window.
i must look for the item i wA referring to.there was even a sketch showing net curtains, i am sure there were window blinds in this room

by Guest 26.10.11 13:44

Marian wrote:I've just noticed that one of the questions scrolling along the top of the portal page is why 2006 is showing on some pages of the online shop. There are some postings on page 2 of this topic which explain this. For once, to paraphrase you know who, there is an innocent explanation for everything that's found!

I'm repeating this comment as I notice that the scrolling question is still there.

by jd 26.10.11 14:02

Though the 2006 explanation is true, this does not necessarily mean they bought a package in 2007 and didn't change the date. They could just as equally have bought the package in 2006 to get the site set up & prepared for May 2007 but forgot to change the copyright to 2007. Its odd that some pages have 2007 and some have 2006, I thought changing copyright dates on a website is a global thing

by **Jill Havern** 26.10.11 14:15

Just because an explanation has been found does not mean it's the correct one.

It is a fact that 2006 appears on the rapidly-set-up online shop when Maddie 'disappeared' in 2007. It is a valid question and it will stay on the scrolling thingy.

And on the subject of the scrolling thingy, many thanks to Moa for pointing out the discrepancy on the inflatable billboard.

by Anders 09.12.11 19:33

Marian wrote:Maybe it's too early in the day for me but surely it was the wooden external shutters that were repaired? They were the ones which were famously quoted as being "jemmied" open by the "abductor" before it was proved that they weren't. I've not heard any mention of the Venetian blind type until now.

Maybe someone can answer this , which I found far too coincidental bearing in mind all the stuff about shutters and windows after Maddie disappeared - dunno where but I read that on the first day the mccanns complained about the shutters and or windows not working ||

Apparently a maintenance crew spent time in the apt getting all ok. I believe they could find nothing wrong - a fe days later the crime happens - all the windows are dusted. It only two things show up

1 a palmprint from a first on the scene cop

2 Kate's prints looking like she opened the window

So

Where we're all the workmens prints?

Or are the maids that fastidious they windowlene every single glass surface inside and out?

Even more bizzaro, why did Kate wash the curtains on the 2nd?

Has she got odd? Compulsion to wash all evidence, before and after I.e. cuddle cat?

Finally can anyone tell me what happened to the sheets in the twins' cots?

We're they ever found?

Are we expected to believe an abductor took Maddie then risked waking up two toddlers to take their bed sheets?

At the least it would have left them cold, and they would have woken up - oh wait, the grandfather said it was regular to dose them to the gills with calpol ...

by Guest 10.12.11 9:14

Anders, the window was cleaned after maintenance came in. I'm not sure where you got the palm print from, that is incorrect. Kate's prints were found on the inside of the window and some unusable prints were found on the outside of the shutter, which according to Professor David Barclay on C4, appear to be in the position of opening it from the inside.

by Liz Eagles 10.12.11 10:09

I lived in a med country for 7 years. I had the same shutters. I locked myself out of the house a couple of times and had to break in through the shutters. I could only lift the mechanism around 18 inches off the floor before it jammed (I'm speaking of the same door/window shutter I deem to be identical to the MC's). I was grateful that I'd been enough of an airhead to leave the interior doors inside the shutters open). Let me tell you, it took me over an hour to get into my house. To lift those shutters is very difficult. It's inch by inch..otherwise it jams. I've looked very hard at those MC shutters and I know they are the same as mine were. It was also a noisy process to break into my house.

I lived in a holiday place . I wasn't a tourist. I had a fully functioning home and lived in it When tourists go to a holiday apartment they are on holiday. They leave the doors open, they let the bugs in, they don't clean up...it's normal...they are on holiday. There is sand in the house, in the loo, there is general untidiness because it's an active holiday and doesn't always have enough storage space to be tidy. There is a smell of bath and sun products. Everything is a bit dusty and a little untidy - the point of a holiday is to spend most of the time outdoors in a warmer climate and not worry about cleaning. The kitchen area is generally sparce and the fridge is stocked with 'make-shift' food.

In holiday places in the Med the cleaners come into your place (when you are out - hopefully). These cleaners see everything. They take your rubbish. They clean your bins. They ignore whether it is neat or a bit or a lot messy. This is the bloody norm for a holiday place

I'm getting to the point here

Were the cleaner's fingerprints in the apartment?
Were the contents of the fridge noted?
Who cleaned the windows? (I ask this because it's not normal to clean the windows of an apartment during residency in my experience - that happens on change-over).
What cleaning products were in the apartment?
What was the content of the kitchen bin?
What was placed into the wardrobes in the apartment?
What was left in suitcases?
Were the suitcases matched to the airline tickets?
Was there an assessment taken of the clothes packed for the children?

just my opinion here.

by Guest 10.12.11 11:23

Good questions aquila. We can only hope most of the answers are in the witheld section of the released DVD.

by Anders 10.12.11 13:32

Stella wrote:Good questions aquila. We can only hope most of the answers are in the witheld section of the released DVD.

Hi Stella!

What withheld DVD? I'm sorry but I'm playing a bit of catchup!

by Anders 10.12.11 13:35

aquila wrote:I lived in a med country for 7 years. I had the same shutters. I locked myself out of the house a couple of times and had to break in through the shutters. I could only lift the mechanism around 18 inches off the floor before it jammed (I'm speaking of the same door/window shutter I deem to be identical to the MC's). I was grateful that I'd been enough of an airhead to leave the interior doors inside the shutters open). Let me tell you, it took me over an hour to get into my house. To lift those shutters is very difficult. It's inch by inch..otherwise it jams. I've looked very hard at those MC shutters and I know they are the same as mine were. It was also a noisy process to break into my house.

I lived in a holiday place . I wasn't a tourist. I had a fully functioning home and lived in it When tourists go to a holiday apartment they are on holiday. They leave the doors open, they let the bugs in, they don't clean up...it's normal...they are on holiday. There is sand in the house, in the loo, there is general untidiness because it's an active holiday and doesn't always have enough storage space to be tidy. There is a smell of bath and sun products. Everything is a bit dusty and a little untidy - the point of a holiday is to spend most of the time outdoors in a warmer climate and not worry about cleaning. The kitchen area is generally sparce and the fridge is stocked with 'make-shift' food.

In holiday places in the Med the cleaners come into your place (when you are out - hopefully). These cleaners see everything. They take your rubbish. They clean your bins. They ignore whether it is neat or a bit or a lot messy. This is the bloody norm for a holiday place

I'm getting to the point here

Were the cleaner's fingerprints in the apartment?
Were the contents of the fridge noted?
Who cleaned the windows? (I ask this because it's not normal to clean the windows of an apartment during residency in my experience - that happens on change-over).
What cleaning products were in the apartment?
What was the content of the kitchen bin?
What was placed into the wardrobes in the apartment?
What was left in suitcases?
Were the suitcases matched to the airline tickets?
Was there an assessment taken of the clothes packed for the children?

just my opinion here.

Hi Aquila!

Superb post, thank you!!! We are thinking on the same wavelength! I am on my iPhone now, will write more later.

Cheers!

A

by Anders 10.12.11 13:46

Stella wrote:Anders, the window was cleaned after maintenance came in. I'm not sure where you got the palm print from, that is incorrect. Kate's prints were found on the inside of the window and some unusable prints were found on the outside of the shutter, which according to Professor David Barclay on C4, appear to be in the position of opening it from the inside.

Thanks Stella,

The palm print was an error by a PJ cop - it is in Goncalo's book. GA was very unhappy with how the first cops on the scene handled things - of course seven doctors knew not to contaminate the crime scene, which is why the apartment resembled a rugby scrum within 10 minutes!!!

This HAD to be intentional - of I was there I'd have shut the door and blocked anyone from going in until the cops took over - once you have established that a chd is missing, that's all there is to it.

And of course during ww3 the twins slept like rip van winkle...

Can someone tell me if the mother was an anaesthetist?

Didn't the grandfather affirm that all three tots were regularly given calpol???

by Shibboleth 10.12.11 19:16

Why they would pay to register www.cuddlecat.co.uk, a toy brand that they do not even own, at the same time of the other websites?

by **tigger** 10.12.11 19:37

Shibboleth wrote:Why they would pay to register www.cuddlecat.co.uk, a toy brand that they do not even own, at the same time of the other websites?

Gosh! I'd forgotten that. Of course this sort of thing doesn't get into the papers. It's a pity because I'm sure that would lose them a few pros.

by Gillyspot 10.12.11 19:39

It was certainly registered by the McCanns webmasters but is now not used.

Details below

http://www.aboutus.org/CuddleCat.co.uk

by Angelique 11.12.11 3:19

LG78 said:

Well Someone lies then, cause the nanny working their said this in her statement

. The question made, she affirms that guests can request ?Staff" services where children are watched between 19H30 and 23H30. Madeleine McCanns parents never requested this service even though it was free;

And:

Stella quoted from Matt's Rogatory statement:
"were all going, oh perhaps we'll be the Billy no mates, the really unpopular ones will get stuck at the Millennium and we won't be able to, we won't be able to go out and visit our friends because we're not going to leave to go and see them and we won't be able to share child care and so it would be fairly difficult and it was a big issue because they couldn't guarantee, the couldn't allocate the rooms for us and they said it'll have to wait until you get in the resort but in the end it was sort of quite quiet and so they sort of could stick us really close together. I can't remember why I started talking about that?"

If you look at these two statements it says a. They didn't want strangers looking after their children and
They wanted rooms close together so they could share child care.

Why would they not want free child care with the same carers and for free ? Because they don't want "strangers" per se. I don't think they wanted anyone anywhere near their apartments - not at all.

Why would that be?

Also they wanted rooms close together so they can share child care - so we believe that meant they took turns to be sick and all children were left together in one room. Which meant all the other apartments were vacant every evening.

So we have nobody hanging around and vacant rooms.

by **tigger** 11.12.11 7:29

Gillyspot wrote:
It was certainly registered by the McCanns webmasters but is now not used.

Details below

http://www.aboutus.org/CuddleCat.co.uk

Is there any way we can find out when it was registered? Cuddlecat infuriates me. It was bought specifically as a prop, it looked brand-new to me, certainly not a toy used daily by Maddie for three plus years.
There are even photographs of it, festooned in rosary beads, bad taste doesn't even come near.

by Shibboleth 11.12.11 7:34

tigger wrote:
Gillyspot wrote:
It was certainly registered by the McCanns webmasters but is now not used.

Details below

http://www.aboutus.org/CuddleCat.co.uk

Is there any way we can find out when it was registered? Cuddlecat infuriates me. It was bought specifically as a prop, it looked brand-new to me, certainly not a toy used daily by Maddie for three plus years.
There are even photographs of it, festooned in rosary beads, bad taste doesn't even come near.

At the same time as the other websites. You can look at archive.org and go back to 2007, it will show an archived version of the site. It does not have it's own materials on it but it re-directs to main McCann website.

by Guest 11.12.11 9:46

the last thing at that time that they should be thinking about was to register ther baby girls sleep toy as a webdomene, trademark or whatever !!?
Come one !! We all know they are guilty as hell and are for some reason beeing protected !!

Well truth always comes to the surface and so it will for this lying couple and their friends !!
Praying to God? Well im sure he has NOT saved a room for them in heaven !!

I do not understand why they are beeing protected , and surtenly do not understand how any people with more than 2 in intelligens can even believe them !!
They are so obviously lying and there are enough evidence to understand Madeleine was not abducted and F### Jane Tanner saw nothing !!!

A few oddities - Page 6 359723

Sorry guys im just so mad to day !! Irritaded about this stupid world !!! All the selfish people only conserned about their own asses !!

by TrollAng 11.12.11 9:56

It was set up on Sat 26th May

by **tigger** 11.12.11 10:29

TrollAng wrote:It was set up on Sat 26th May

B........y Hell! Sorry, I'm catching Moa's anger, it's infectious.
By the way, how did you get that? I went to the archive website but got nothing much, must be doing something wrong. CC was probably bought not long before the PdL trip. There is a great lack of cuddle cat in all but one of the earlier photographs which only shows a pink area which could also be a towel or a blanket. For a child that was 'inseparable' from her toy, that's strange.
By some strange precognitive sense, Kate was so fond of it herself, that she took it to the mortuary with her. So before the PdL trip, she already had this link with a child who was still alive and kicking. The whole thing just shows her complete lack of empathy. If your child has a favourite, comforting toy, that should certainly be with her when the mother is absent. It doesn't really work the other way round, Kate, because that would mean leaving your child alone and without any comfort whatsoever. angry2

'Que Dieu toi donne, et voir, et voir - ce que je pense, etcetera...
(paraphrased Francois Villon - may God give you what I am thinking of - etc.)

by Nina 11.12.11 10:32

Angelique wrote:LG78 said:

Well Someone lies then, cause the nanny working their said this in her statement

. The question made, she affirms that guests can request ?Staff" services where children are watched between 19H30 and 23H30. Madeleine McCanns parents never requested this service even though it was free;

And:

Stella quoted from Matt's Rogatory statement:
"were all going, oh perhaps we'll be the Billy no mates, the really unpopular ones will get stuck at the Millennium and we won't be able to, we won't be able to go out and visit our friends because we're not going to leave to go and see them and we won't be able to share child care and so it would be fairly difficult and it was a big issue because they couldn't guarantee, the couldn't allocate the rooms for us and they said it'll have to wait until you get in the resort but in the end it was sort of quite quiet and so they sort of could stick us really close together. I can't remember why I started talking about that?"

If you look at these two statements it says a. They didn't want strangers looking after their children and
They wanted rooms close together so they could share child care.

Why would they not want free child care with the same carers and for free ? Because they don't want "strangers" per se. I don't think they wanted anyone anywhere near their apartments - not at all.

Why would that be?

Also they wanted rooms close together so they can share child care - so we believe that meant they took turns to be sick and all children were left together in one room. Which meant all the other apartments were vacant every evening.

So we have nobody hanging around and vacant rooms.

Hi Angelique, re the "child care" comments. Childcare is 24/7 with such young children, they need supervision for everything in their day so it could refer to feeding, bathing, play, everything the child does through their day and night. Even a nip to the supermarket for the bottle of NZ wine might carry "will you watch the kids for 5 minutes"?

Is this what they meant by sharing childcare?