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

Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

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

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by sharonl on 25.05.15 7:38

@Joss wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Joss wrote:What is so unreal about all of the baby checking b.s., is how on earth would anyone take such a huge risk with their babies when there were babysitters available and would have been way more risk free and given the parents peace of mind to enjoy some time child free with the other adults. Why on earth would they do such a thing? Talk about courting disaster, they sure did, and that makes no sense whatsoever with such very young children. Seems like their parental responsibilities flew out the door. And i don't believe the nonsense about "it was so safe", it was not safe what they did, and those people are doctors, SMH.
My thoughts exactly Joss!  Apart from the ridiculous notion that anyone would consider actually do something so irresponsible and reckless (even though they were so into each other ???), how can you enjoy a meal when up and down like a yoyo every fifteen minutes.  No wonder Gerry took indigestion medication with him, all that gyrating about must play havoc with semi-digested sardines and local belly wash.
Exactly Verdi. I don't think the tapas lot were even all best buds of the McC's were they? I think the McC's were good friends with the Payne's and i'm not sure about any of the others? And that is why non of it makes sense to cover up & lie in a missing child case for the McC's. No decent person would do such a thing.

I have to agree with you on the best buddies point, so why then, when the rest of the party were enjoying their lunch break on the Paynes' balcony, where the McCanns eating in their own apartment which was just below, in the early part of the holiday?

Further to this, why were the shutters closed in the kids room during the days? Kate contradicts herself in saying that she wanted to keep the heat out, but later says that the room wasn't used during the day and it was cold in there at night.

____________________
"WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER" - Rebekah Brooks to David Cameron

sharonl


Posts : 3609
Reputation : 438
Join date : 2009-12-29

View user profile http://www.cold2012.org.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Carrry On Doctor on 25.05.15 8:06

@Joss wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Joss wrote:What is so unreal about all of the baby checking b.s., is how on earth would anyone take such a huge risk with their babies when there were babysitters available and would have been way more risk free and given the parents peace of mind to enjoy some time child free with the other adults. Why on earth would they do such a thing? Talk about courting disaster, they sure did, and that makes no sense whatsoever with such very young children. Seems like their parental responsibilities flew out the door. And i don't believe the nonsense about "it was so safe", it was not safe what they did, and those people are doctors, SMH.
My thoughts exactly Joss!  Apart from the ridiculous notion that anyone would consider actually do something so irresponsible and reckless (even though they were so into each other ???), how can you enjoy a meal when up and down like a yoyo every fifteen minutes.  No wonder Gerry took indigestion medication with him, all that gyrating about must play havoc with semi-digested sardines and local belly wash.
Exactly Verdi. I don't think the tapas lot were even all best buds of the McC's were they? I think the McC's were good friends with the Payne's and i'm not sure about any of the others? And that is why non of it makes sense to cover up & lie in a missing child case for the McC's. No decent person would do such a thing.

I think there is a core of T9 that know exactly what happened.....TM's along with another couple. I don't believe TM or the others were bad parents, and so I doubt any of the children would have been left alone in any apartment. IMO this points to the parents being present when MBM met her fate. Given MBM was a difficult child, and the personalities of her parents, this points to her being struck, and suffering a non-intentional fatal injury. Many things suggest this happened early in the holiday IMO.

Confronted with the reality of the death of a child, anyone would come clean and co-operate fully with the investigation, and their stories would tie up because it is the truth. When questioned, you could start from the beginning, or work your way backwards, or go anywhere in-between. It doesn't matter, because its the truth. But the T9 & close family stories have been exposed as flawed and from a script. Pre-planned to simulate an abduction to explain the disappearance of a child.

For me, this is the hallmark of planning and not something concocted on the night. The very forceful and controlling personality of GM would firstly have evaluated the situation, worked out what was the best outcome (for them), and then firmly sold the idea to others.

So why would the others go along with it ? What ties all of the T9 together....their pact of silence ? What hold did GM have over them to get them to play along and follow the script ? The answer is simple and straightforward. Self preservation to protect their reputations and family. All of them young, attractive, middle class, professional, with happy lives, good prospects, and children. The 'bond' I believe is the liberal swapping of sexual partners. In the circumstance of a child's death, they would have been destroyed by the press and would be forever labelled as swingers. All they strived for would be lost, and they would forever live with the stigma of a death occurring whilst they were 'into each other'. GM would have driven this message home very forcefully, so by telling a few white lies about their movements that week they could avoid all the consequences, unpleasantness, and permanent ridicule.

IMO partner swapping / swinging is the skeleton in the closet of this case, a theory supported by GA himself. Despite them not being a close group initially, the internet provides a forum for clubs and gatherings, and so it is totally feasible that a wider circle of like minded people congregate to share adult activities.

Baby monitors may have indeed been used, but IMO this is a careful part of the strategy to reduce the likelihood of prosecution for abandonment. Its all been carefully thought through, and retro-fitted when required.Trouble is, in limited time, you cant plan for and cover everything.

It is all unravelling. We just need the evidence, or for the evidence to be admissible. Maybe the new ruling on text message content can help provide this. We live in hope.

All of the above IMO.

Carrry On Doctor

Posts : 346
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2014-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by aquila on 25.05.15 8:47

I still can't buy the swinging theory. Too many high level people turned up immediately that Madeleine disappeared. The UK ptb would have thought nothing of sacrificing a handful of doctors to the world press.

The Portuguese detectives in situ would have known about any swinging going on - believe me, olive trees have eyes and ears - and when detectives are accused of sitting sipping wine and having lunch they are actually working. I believe Goncalo Amaral knows much more than he is letting on or is allowed to speak of. There's an underbelly in a holiday village that knows everything. This expat enclave is keeping a secret that locals know and it's not swinging.

Just my opinion.

aquila

Posts : 7957
Reputation : 1182
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Carrry On Doctor on 25.05.15 9:17

@aquila wrote:I still can't buy the swinging theory. Too many high level people turned up immediately that Madeleine disappeared. The UK ptb would have thought nothing of sacrificing a handful of doctors to the world press.

The Portuguese detectives in situ would have known about any swinging going on - believe me, olive trees have eyes and ears - and when detectives are accused of sitting sipping wine and having lunch they are actually working. I believe Goncalo Amaral knows much more than he is letting on or is allowed to speak of. There's an underbelly in a holiday village that knows everything. This expat enclave is keeping a secret that locals know and it's not swinging.

Just my opinion.

Fair comment, you could be right, but I don't think anything more sinister fits with a family holiday. GA thought swinging was going on and I think he would have known if it was more serious than that.

For so many people to appear at short notice is perhaps another indicator of pre-planning. Brother Gerry has very good connections.

Yes I agree, GA will likely know much more. He will still have friends in the PJ.

IMO

Carrry On Doctor

Posts : 346
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2014-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Joss on 25.05.15 11:29

@sharonl wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Joss wrote:What is so unreal about all of the baby checking b.s., is how on earth would anyone take such a huge risk with their babies when there were babysitters available and would have been way more risk free and given the parents peace of mind to enjoy some time child free with the other adults. Why on earth would they do such a thing? Talk about courting disaster, they sure did, and that makes no sense whatsoever with such very young children. Seems like their parental responsibilities flew out the door. And i don't believe the nonsense about "it was so safe", it was not safe what they did, and those people are doctors, SMH.
My thoughts exactly Joss!  Apart from the ridiculous notion that anyone would consider actually do something so irresponsible and reckless (even though they were so into each other ???), how can you enjoy a meal when up and down like a yoyo every fifteen minutes.  No wonder Gerry took indigestion medication with him, all that gyrating about must play havoc with semi-digested sardines and local belly wash.
Exactly Verdi. I don't think the tapas lot were even all best buds of the McC's were they? I think the McC's were good friends with the Payne's and i'm not sure about any of the others? And that is why non of it makes sense to cover up & lie in a missing child case for the McC's. No decent person would do such a thing.

I have to agree with you on the best buddies point, so why then, when the rest of the party were enjoying their lunch break on the Paynes' balcony, where the McCanns eating in their own apartment which was just below, in the early part of the holiday?

Further to this, why were the shutters closed in the kids room during the days? Kate contradicts herself in saying that she wanted to keep the heat out, but later says that the room wasn't used during the day and it was cold in there at night.
Hi sharonl, The stories we have heard about in this case have more twists & turns than a game of snakes & ladders, and seems an exercise to deliberately mislead everyone that questions Madeleine's fate.
What i find difficult to believe also is the fact there was no DNA of Maddie's in the holiday apartment, apart from what the dogs detected. Didn't one of the McC's have to go back to the family home in the U.K. to obtain a sample of Maddie's DNA? Surely if the little girl was on holiday with her family in PdL there would be DNA of hers in that apartment, on cuddle cat & her pillow & blanket? Funny how K. Mc washed Maddie's cuddle cat, and how the dogs alerted to the cat and other McC items for cadaver evidence. If that isn't suspicious i don't know what is.

Joss

Posts : 1907
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Verdi on 25.05.15 11:53

@Carrry On Doctor wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Joss wrote:What is so unreal about all of the baby checking b.s., is how on earth would anyone take such a huge risk with their babies when there were babysitters available and would have been way more risk free and given the parents peace of mind to enjoy some time child free with the other adults. Why on earth would they do such a thing? Talk about courting disaster, they sure did, and that makes no sense whatsoever with such very young children. Seems like their parental responsibilities flew out the door. And i don't believe the nonsense about "it was so safe", it was not safe what they did, and those people are doctors, SMH.
My thoughts exactly Joss!  Apart from the ridiculous notion that anyone would consider actually do something so irresponsible and reckless (even though they were so into each other ???), how can you enjoy a meal when up and down like a yoyo every fifteen minutes.  No wonder Gerry took indigestion medication with him, all that gyrating about must play havoc with semi-digested sardines and local belly wash.
Exactly Verdi. I don't think the tapas lot were even all best buds of the McC's were they? I think the McC's were good friends with the Payne's and i'm not sure about any of the others? And that is why non of it makes sense to cover up & lie in a missing child case for the McC's. No decent person would do such a thing.

I think there is a core of T9 that know exactly what happened.....TM's along with another couple. I don't believe TM or the others were bad parents, and so I doubt any of the children would have been left alone in any apartment. IMO this points to the parents being present when MBM met her fate. Given MBM was a difficult child, and the personalities of her parents, this points to her being struck, and suffering a non-intentional fatal injury. Many things suggest this happened early in the holiday IMO.

Confronted with the reality of the death of a child, anyone would come clean and co-operate fully with the investigation, and their stories would tie up because it is the truth. When questioned, you could start from the beginning, or work your way backwards, or go anywhere in-between. It doesn't matter, because its the truth. But the T9 & close family stories have been exposed as flawed and from a script. Pre-planned to simulate an abduction to explain the disappearance of a child.

For me, this is the hallmark of planning and not something concocted on the night. The very forceful and controlling personality of GM would firstly have evaluated the situation, worked out what was the best outcome (for them), and then firmly sold the idea to others.

So why would the others go along with it ? What ties all of the T9 together....their pact of silence ? What hold did GM have over them to get them to play along and follow the script ? The answer is simple and straightforward. Self preservation to protect their reputations and family. All of them young, attractive, middle class, professional, with happy lives, good prospects, and children. The 'bond' I believe is the liberal swapping of sexual partners. In the circumstance of a child's death, they would have been destroyed by the press and would be forever labelled as swingers. All they strived for would be lost, and they would forever live with the stigma of a death occurring whilst they were 'into each other'. GM would have driven this message home very forcefully, so by telling a few white lies about their movements that week they could avoid all the consequences, unpleasantness, and permanent ridicule.

IMO partner swapping / swinging is the skeleton in the closet of this case, a theory supported by GA himself. Despite them not being a close group initially, the internet provides a forum for clubs and gatherings, and so it is totally feasible that a wider circle of like minded people congregate to share adult activities.

Baby monitors may have indeed been used, but IMO this is a careful part of the strategy to reduce the likelihood of prosecution for abandonment. Its all been carefully thought through, and retro-fitted when required.Trouble is, in limited time, you cant plan for and cover everything.

It is all unravelling. We just need the evidence, or for the evidence to be admissible. Maybe the new ruling on text message content can help provide this. We live in hope.

All of the above IMO.
Swinging is nothing new, it's being going on for decades - even ancient civilizations were notorious for the orgies so nothing changes in that respect.  There is no stigma attached to being a swinger, these days it's probably quite trendy in middle class circles, like snorting cocaine on social occasions, I certainly don't think general knowledge of their private shenanigans would affect their social standing or careers.

If Madeleine died as a result of an innocent tragic accident (as can happen) there would be no need for a cover-up or pact of silence.  If she died as a result of physical abuse by one of the parents in a rage, there would be no need for the rest of the group to cover for them.  If she died as a result of something more sinister, involving or accepted by the whole group then there would be every need for a cover up and pact of silence!

Then came a bloodhound on the scene by the name of Goncalo Amaral - the rest as they say is history.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

Verdi

Posts : 3771
Reputation : 2208
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Joss on 25.05.15 12:20

@Verdi wrote:
@Carrry On Doctor wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Joss wrote:What is so unreal about all of the baby checking b.s., is how on earth would anyone take such a huge risk with their babies when there were babysitters available and would have been way more risk free and given the parents peace of mind to enjoy some time child free with the other adults. Why on earth would they do such a thing? Talk about courting disaster, they sure did, and that makes no sense whatsoever with such very young children. Seems like their parental responsibilities flew out the door. And i don't believe the nonsense about "it was so safe", it was not safe what they did, and those people are doctors, SMH.
My thoughts exactly Joss!  Apart from the ridiculous notion that anyone would consider actually do something so irresponsible and reckless (even though they were so into each other ???), how can you enjoy a meal when up and down like a yoyo every fifteen minutes.  No wonder Gerry took indigestion medication with him, all that gyrating about must play havoc with semi-digested sardines and local belly wash.
Exactly Verdi. I don't think the tapas lot were even all best buds of the McC's were they? I think the McC's were good friends with the Payne's and i'm not sure about any of the others? And that is why non of it makes sense to cover up & lie in a missing child case for the McC's. No decent person would do such a thing.

I think there is a core of T9 that know exactly what happened.....TM's along with another couple. I don't believe TM or the others were bad parents, and so I doubt any of the children would have been left alone in any apartment. IMO this points to the parents being present when MBM met her fate. Given MBM was a difficult child, and the personalities of her parents, this points to her being struck, and suffering a non-intentional fatal injury. Many things suggest this happened early in the holiday IMO.

Confronted with the reality of the death of a child, anyone would come clean and co-operate fully with the investigation, and their stories would tie up because it is the truth. When questioned, you could start from the beginning, or work your way backwards, or go anywhere in-between. It doesn't matter, because its the truth. But the T9 & close family stories have been exposed as flawed and from a script. Pre-planned to simulate an abduction to explain the disappearance of a child.

For me, this is the hallmark of planning and not something concocted on the night. The very forceful and controlling personality of GM would firstly have evaluated the situation, worked out what was the best outcome (for them), and then firmly sold the idea to others.

So why would the others go along with it ? What ties all of the T9 together....their pact of silence ? What hold did GM have over them to get them to play along and follow the script ? The answer is simple and straightforward. Self preservation to protect their reputations and family. All of them young, attractive, middle class, professional, with happy lives, good prospects, and children. The 'bond' I believe is the liberal swapping of sexual partners. In the circumstance of a child's death, they would have been destroyed by the press and would be forever labelled as swingers. All they strived for would be lost, and they would forever live with the stigma of a death occurring whilst they were 'into each other'. GM would have driven this message home very forcefully, so by telling a few white lies about their movements that week they could avoid all the consequences, unpleasantness, and permanent ridicule.

IMO partner swapping / swinging is the skeleton in the closet of this case, a theory supported by GA himself. Despite them not being a close group initially, the internet provides a forum for clubs and gatherings, and so it is totally feasible that a wider circle of like minded people congregate to share adult activities.

Baby monitors may have indeed been used, but IMO this is a careful part of the strategy to reduce the likelihood of prosecution for abandonment. Its all been carefully thought through, and retro-fitted when required.Trouble is, in limited time, you cant plan for and cover everything.

It is all unravelling. We just need the evidence, or for the evidence to be admissible. Maybe the new ruling on text message content can help provide this. We live in hope.

All of the above IMO.
Swinging is nothing new, it's being going on for decades - even ancient civilizations were notorious for the orgies so nothing changes in that respect.  There is no stigma attached to being a swinger, these days it's probably quite trendy in middle class circles, like snorting cocaine on social occasions, I certainly don't think general knowledge of their private shenanigans would affect their social standing or careers.

If Madeleine died as a result of an innocent tragic accident (as can happen) there would be no need for a cover-up or pact of silence.  If she died as a result of physical abuse by one of the parents in a rage, there would be no need for the rest of the group to cover for them.  If she died as a result of something more sinister, involving or accepted by the whole group then there would be every need for a cover up and pact of silence!

Then came a bloodhound on the scene by the name of Goncalo Amaral - the rest as they say is history.
I agree, the swinging is no big deal as such, and it wouldn't have affected anything unless Maddie died because of it.
Meaning that if they drugged the kids to engage in such activity to keep the children quiet, and Madeleine came to grief because of that, then they had a problem.
But i don't think that was it. They all dined together on that night Maddie disappeared, and if they were going to go off swinging after dinner, would that of meant the kids would of been out of sight & hearing for even quite a few more hours? I doubt it, and why would they need to go on a family holiday all of them, to do that? Surely they could of done that back at home in the U.K. and had meet ups for a weekend while they left the kids with a responsible babysitter to have their fun.
I think there was something else going on with all of them, but not sure what.

Joss

Posts : 1907
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Verdi on 25.05.15 12:35

@Joss wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Carrry On Doctor wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Joss wrote:What is so unreal about all of the baby checking b.s., is how on earth would anyone take such a huge risk with their babies when there were babysitters available and would have been way more risk free and given the parents peace of mind to enjoy some time child free with the other adults. Why on earth would they do such a thing? Talk about courting disaster, they sure did, and that makes no sense whatsoever with such very young children. Seems like their parental responsibilities flew out the door. And i don't believe the nonsense about "it was so safe", it was not safe what they did, and those people are doctors, SMH.
My thoughts exactly Joss!  Apart from the ridiculous notion that anyone would consider actually do something so irresponsible and reckless (even though they were so into each other ???), how can you enjoy a meal when up and down like a yoyo every fifteen minutes.  No wonder Gerry took indigestion medication with him, all that gyrating about must play havoc with semi-digested sardines and local belly wash.
Exactly Verdi. I don't think the tapas lot were even all best buds of the McC's were they? I think the McC's were good friends with the Payne's and i'm not sure about any of the others? And that is why non of it makes sense to cover up & lie in a missing child case for the McC's. No decent person would do such a thing.

I think there is a core of T9 that know exactly what happened.....TM's along with another couple. I don't believe TM or the others were bad parents, and so I doubt any of the children would have been left alone in any apartment. IMO this points to the parents being present when MBM met her fate. Given MBM was a difficult child, and the personalities of her parents, this points to her being struck, and suffering a non-intentional fatal injury. Many things suggest this happened early in the holiday IMO.

Confronted with the reality of the death of a child, anyone would come clean and co-operate fully with the investigation, and their stories would tie up because it is the truth. When questioned, you could start from the beginning, or work your way backwards, or go anywhere in-between. It doesn't matter, because its the truth. But the T9 & close family stories have been exposed as flawed and from a script. Pre-planned to simulate an abduction to explain the disappearance of a child.

For me, this is the hallmark of planning and not something concocted on the night. The very forceful and controlling personality of GM would firstly have evaluated the situation, worked out what was the best outcome (for them), and then firmly sold the idea to others.

So why would the others go along with it ? What ties all of the T9 together....their pact of silence ? What hold did GM have over them to get them to play along and follow the script ? The answer is simple and straightforward. Self preservation to protect their reputations and family. All of them young, attractive, middle class, professional, with happy lives, good prospects, and children. The 'bond' I believe is the liberal swapping of sexual partners. In the circumstance of a child's death, they would have been destroyed by the press and would be forever labelled as swingers. All they strived for would be lost, and they would forever live with the stigma of a death occurring whilst they were 'into each other'. GM would have driven this message home very forcefully, so by telling a few white lies about their movements that week they could avoid all the consequences, unpleasantness, and permanent ridicule.

IMO partner swapping / swinging is the skeleton in the closet of this case, a theory supported by GA himself. Despite them not being a close group initially, the internet provides a forum for clubs and gatherings, and so it is totally feasible that a wider circle of like minded people congregate to share adult activities.

Baby monitors may have indeed been used, but IMO this is a careful part of the strategy to reduce the likelihood of prosecution for abandonment. Its all been carefully thought through, and retro-fitted when required.Trouble is, in limited time, you cant plan for and cover everything.

It is all unravelling. We just need the evidence, or for the evidence to be admissible. Maybe the new ruling on text message content can help provide this. We live in hope.

All of the above IMO.
Swinging is nothing new, it's being going on for decades - even ancient civilizations were notorious for the orgies so nothing changes in that respect.  There is no stigma attached to being a swinger, these days it's probably quite trendy in middle class circles, like snorting cocaine on social occasions, I certainly don't think general knowledge of their private shenanigans would affect their social standing or careers.

If Madeleine died as a result of an innocent tragic accident (as can happen) there would be no need for a cover-up or pact of silence.  If she died as a result of physical abuse by one of the parents in a rage, there would be no need for the rest of the group to cover for them.  If she died as a result of something more sinister, involving or accepted by the whole group then there would be every need for a cover up and pact of silence!

Then came a bloodhound on the scene by the name of Goncalo Amaral - the rest as they say is history.
I agree, the swinging is no big deal as such, and it wouldn't have affected anything unless Maddie died because of it.
Meaning that if they drugged the kids to engage in such activity to keep the children quiet, and Madeleine came to grief because of that, then they had a problem.
But i don't think that was it. They all dined together on that night Maddie disappeared, and if they were going to go off swinging after dinner, would that of meant the kids would of been out of sight & hearing for even quite a few more hours? I doubt it, and why would they need to go on a family holiday all of them, to do that? Surely they could of done that back at home in the U.K. and had meet ups for a weekend while they left the kids with a responsible babysitter to have their fun.
I think there was something else going on with all of them, but not sure what.
The more you think about it the more ridiculous the swinging theory appears.  No it doesn't make any sense at all.

The subject of the children being drugged continues to be a bone of contention.  For a start, if the McCann children had been drugged every night to keep them quiet while the parents were dining, how does that fit in with Pamela Fenn's claim that she heard a child crying continuously for over an hour?

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

Verdi

Posts : 3771
Reputation : 2208
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by BlueBag on 25.05.15 12:59

@Verdi wrote:The subject of the children being drugged continues to be a bone of contention.  For a start, if the McCann children had been drugged every night to keep them quiet while the parents were dining, how does that fit in with Pamela Fenn's claim that she heard a child crying continuously for over an hour?
Perhaps the dosage was deemed inadequate and more medication was needed on subsequent nights.

Madeleine was supposed to be tired and out of sorts on Thursday.

BlueBag

Posts : 3562
Reputation : 1351
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Joss on 25.05.15 13:26

@Verdi wrote:
@Joss wrote:



Swinging is nothing new, it's being going on for decades - even ancient civilizations were notorious for the orgies so nothing changes in that respect.  There is no stigma attached to being a swinger, these days it's probably quite trendy in middle class circles, like snorting cocaine on social occasions, I certainly don't think general knowledge of their private shenanigans would affect their social standing or careers.

If Madeleine died as a result of an innocent tragic accident (as can happen) there would be no need for a cover-up or pact of silence.  If she died as a result of physical abuse by one of the parents in a rage, there would be no need for the rest of the group to cover for them.  If she died as a result of something more sinister, involving or accepted by the whole group then there would be every need for a cover up and pact of silence!

Then came a bloodhound on the scene by the name of Goncalo Amaral - the rest as they say is history.
I agree, the swinging is no big deal as such, and it wouldn't have affected anything unless Maddie died because of it.
Meaning that if they drugged the kids to engage in such activity to keep the children quiet, and Madeleine came to grief because of that, then they had a problem.
But i don't think that was it. They all dined together on that night Maddie disappeared, and if they were going to go off swinging after dinner, would that of meant the kids would of been out of sight & hearing for even quite a few more hours? I doubt it, and why would they need to go on a family holiday all of them, to do that? Surely they could of done that back at home in the U.K. and had meet ups for a weekend while they left the kids with a responsible babysitter to have their fun.
I think there was something else going on with all of them, but not sure what.
The more you think about it the more ridiculous the swinging theory appears.  No it doesn't make any sense at all.

The subject of the children being drugged continues to be a bone of contention.  For a start, if the McCann children had been drugged every night to keep them quiet while the parents were dining, how does that fit in with Pamela Fenn's claim that she heard a child crying continuously for over an hour?
Well some theorise P. Fenn was not being truthful because she knew the Murat's?  But i'm not sure if an elderly lady would lie about such an important event, so will give that the benefit of doubt.
The drugging to me is feasible, because Kate McCann had a suspicion of the children being drugged and mentions it at some point. The night of Maddie's disappearance she kept checking if the twins were breathing, because they never stirred through all the noise going on in the apartment. If she was so worried about the twins, especially after her eldest child had just disappeared, and according to the McC's a child abductor had just been with the children and stolen one of them, why didn't she take them to the local ER to get them checked for any kind of harm to them? That part is nonsensical too.

Joss

Posts : 1907
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by j.rob on 25.05.15 18:02

I very much doubt GM is the biological father of MBM. Newspaper reports at the time (Oct 2007) suggest that authorities had identified the real dad (....she was 'nearly perfect').


---------


If these reports are true then this might explain why - once the twins came along and Kate and Gerry have a ready-made family of a boy and a girl both of which are Kate AND Gerrys - Madeleine sadly became 'dispensable.' Gerry does not strike me as the kind of man who would want to raise another man's biological child. Not at all.

As for the 'swinging' theory I really don't think this could possibly account for such a high level cover-up and so much early support from such high places.

I know some have theorized that medical experimentation might lie at least partly behind the cover-up? It's not impossible. It is of interest to me that Madeleine's medical records were with-held. Plus we never hear anything about the family's past history. So much seems shrouded in mystery and so few people speak up about the McCann family.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 228
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Carrry On Doctor on 25.05.15 20:18

@j.rob wrote:I very much doubt GM is the biological father of MBM. Newspaper reports at the time (Oct 2007) suggest that authorities had identified the real dad (....she was 'nearly perfect').


---------


If these reports are true then this might explain why - once the twins came along and Kate and Gerry have a ready-made family of a boy and a girl both of which are Kate AND Gerrys - Madeleine sadly became 'dispensable.' Gerry does not strike me as the kind of man who would want to raise another man's biological child. Not at all.

As for the 'swinging' theory I really don't think this could possibly account for such a high level cover-up and so much early support from such high places.

I know some have theorized that medical experimentation might lie at least partly behind the cover-up? It's not impossible. It is of interest to me that Madeleine's medical records were with-held. Plus we never hear anything about the family's past history. So much seems shrouded in mystery and so few people speak up about the McCann family.

Yes, and the only confirmation that GM was the biological father came from Clarence Mitchell !

Just going back to the responses on swinging (I think swapping partners more than swinging as a group activity IMO), which seem to be a rebuttal of the idea since it is not serious enough to conceal the death of a child. TM's et al are engulfed in their own self importance. Image, status, and winning at all costs is evidently king, so I think this is totally feasible. They were sold a pup and made their decision at the time to go along with the bully boy.

Winning at all costs - just like Gerry's hero Lance Armstrong.

Hell mend them.

IMO.

Carrry On Doctor

Posts : 346
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2014-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by j.rob on 25.05.15 23:37

Yes, and the only confirmation that GM was the biological father came from Clarence Mitchell !


----


Oh but it MUST be true then!  We know that when Clarence opens his mouth only the truth will come out......

lol4

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 228
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by XTC on 27.05.15 23:20

@Joss wrote:
@sharonl wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Joss wrote:What is so unreal about all of the baby checking b.s., is how on earth would anyone take such a huge risk with their babies when there were babysitters available and would have been way more risk free and given the parents peace of mind to enjoy some time child free with the other adults. Why on earth would they do such a thing? Talk about courting disaster, they sure did, and that makes no sense whatsoever with such very young children. Seems like their parental responsibilities flew out the door. And i don't believe the nonsense about "it was so safe", it was not safe what they did, and those people are doctors, SMH.
My thoughts exactly Joss!  Apart from the ridiculous notion that anyone would consider actually do something so irresponsible and reckless (even though they were so into each other ???), how can you enjoy a meal when up and down like a yoyo every fifteen minutes.  No wonder Gerry took indigestion medication with him, all that gyrating about must play havoc with semi-digested sardines and local belly wash.
Exactly Verdi. I don't think the tapas lot were even all best buds of the McC's were they? I think the McC's were good friends with the Payne's and i'm not sure about any of the others? And that is why non of it makes sense to cover up & lie in a missing child case for the McC's. No decent person would do such a thing.

I have to agree with you on the best buddies point, so why then, when the rest of the party were enjoying their lunch break on the Paynes' balcony, where the McCanns eating in their own apartment which was just below, in the early part of the holiday?

Further to this, why were the shutters closed in the kids room during the days? Kate contradicts herself in saying that she wanted to keep the heat out, but later says that the room wasn't used during the day and it was cold in there at night.
Hi sharonl, The stories we have heard about in this case have more twists & turns than a game of snakes & ladders, and seems an exercise to deliberately mislead everyone that questions Madeleine's fate.
What i find difficult to believe also is the fact there was no DNA of Maddie's in the holiday apartment, apart from what the dogs detected. Didn't one of the McC's have to go back to the family home in the U.K. to obtain a sample of Maddie's DNA? Surely if the little girl was on holiday with her family in PdL there would be DNA of hers in that apartment, on cuddle cat & her pillow & blanket? Funny how K. Mc washed Maddie's cuddle cat, and how the dogs alerted to the cat and other McC items for cadaver evidence. If that isn't suspicious i don't know what is.
These are very good points re: who knew who and in my humble opinion Mr Payne is the conduit for some reason.

If I'm correct he was the facilitator of the group coming together. He is allegedly the one who took all the deposits and booked the holiday for at least 8 of the nine ( Diane Webster was an addition apparently).

I have always had the feeling that they really didn't know each other between the 9 very well at all save the McCanns and the Paynes. This holiday was the first time they all met up I think.

This is only an opinion of course.

Vis: the DNA - This is and for my money has been a curious aspect of the whole case for the simple reason that surely it is necessary to establish as to whether Madeleine was in 5a in order to be removed by anyone? If the PJ couldn't or SY can't establish that fact they are starting off on possibly a wrong premise.

What is established in my opinion is that the pillowcase sample is not one of the twins and that whomever the pillowcase belongs to it matches the parental control sample. That is all.

The ex FSS had ( and SY should still should have ) Madeleine's provenanced Nuclear DNA sample ( the heel stick test - blood spot in a cardboard frame ) as a much better example of DNA to test against. As far as I know this has never been cross referenced with the parental control sample and or the Renault Scenic and forensic evidence taken from 5a.

Therefore in my view it is crucial to make sure via these forensic evidences taken from 5a that Madeleine was indeed in 5a in order to be taken. If not SY and the PJ only have subjective evidence ( words)  to go off not objective ( forensic ) evidence to make sure that they are not being led a merry dance.

All opinion though.

XTC

Posts : 210
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-03-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by joyce1938 on 27.05.15 23:27

I have a memory that the heel prick sample was said to march the pillowcase from rothley,maybe someone with better skills will have a look see .I recall of it being spoken about a lot on another site some time ago.joyce1938

joyce1938

Posts : 807
Reputation : 87
Join date : 2010-04-20
Age : 78
Location : england

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Verdi on 28.05.15 1:15

@joyce1938 wrote:I have a memory that the heel prick sample was said to march the pillowcase from rothley,maybe someone with better skills will have a look see .I recall of it being spoken about a lot on another site some time ago.joyce1938
joyce you are a supernova,  I'm over the moon that you've raised the subject!  You are quite correct, the pillow case ostensibly collected by someone from the Rothley home was matched against a blood spot delivered to the FSS by Leicester police.

Now, the pillow case is a bone of contention in itself worthy of scrutiny but right now I challenge anyone to confirm 100% that the blood sample was in fact a Guthrie heal prick blood sample.  Not a spot of blood in a cardboard frame but a bone fide Guthrie card - which incidentally is not in truth contained in a cardboard frame.

More on that later when I have time but if anyone can stone me down in the interim, feel free!

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

Verdi

Posts : 3771
Reputation : 2208
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by sar on 28.05.15 9:30

@XTC wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@sharonl wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Joss wrote:What is so unreal about all of the baby checking b.s., is how on earth would anyone take such a huge risk with their babies when there were babysitters available and would have been way more risk free and given the parents peace of mind to enjoy some time child free with the other adults. Why on earth would they do such a thing? Talk about courting disaster, they sure did, and that makes no sense whatsoever with such very young children. Seems like their parental responsibilities flew out the door. And i don't believe the nonsense about "it was so safe", it was not safe what they did, and those people are doctors, SMH.
My thoughts exactly Joss!  Apart from the ridiculous notion that anyone would consider actually do something so irresponsible and reckless (even though they were so into each other ???), how can you enjoy a meal when up and down like a yoyo every fifteen minutes.  No wonder Gerry took indigestion medication with him, all that gyrating about must play havoc with semi-digested sardines and local belly wash.
Exactly Verdi. I don't think the tapas lot were even all best buds of the McC's were they? I think the McC's were good friends with the Payne's and i'm not sure about any of the others? And that is why non of it makes sense to cover up & lie in a missing child case for the McC's. No decent person would do such a thing.

I have to agree with you on the best buddies point, so why then, when the rest of the party were enjoying their lunch break on the Paynes' balcony, where the McCanns eating in their own apartment which was just below, in the early part of the holiday?

Further to this, why were the shutters closed in the kids room during the days? Kate contradicts herself in saying that she wanted to keep the heat out, but later says that the room wasn't used during the day and it was cold in there at night.
Hi sharonl, The stories we have heard about in this case have more twists & turns than a game of snakes & ladders, and seems an exercise to deliberately mislead everyone that questions Madeleine's fate.
What i find difficult to believe also is the fact there was no DNA of Maddie's in the holiday apartment, apart from what the dogs detected. Didn't one of the McC's have to go back to the family home in the U.K. to obtain a sample of Maddie's DNA? Surely if the little girl was on holiday with her family in PdL there would be DNA of hers in that apartment, on cuddle cat & her pillow & blanket? Funny how K. Mc washed Maddie's cuddle cat, and how the dogs alerted to the cat and other McC items for cadaver evidence. If that isn't suspicious i don't know what is.
These are very good points re: who knew who and in my humble opinion Mr Payne is the conduit for some reason.

If I'm correct he was the facilitator of the group coming together. He is allegedly the one who took all the deposits and booked the holiday for at least 8 of the nine ( Diane Webster was an addition apparently).

I have always had the feeling that they really didn't know each other between the 9 very well at all save the McCanns and the Paynes. This holiday was the first time they all met up I think.

This is only an opinion of course.

Vis: the DNA - This is and for my money has been a curious aspect of the whole case for the simple reason that surely it is necessary to establish as to whether Madeleine was in 5a in order to be removed by anyone? If the PJ couldn't or SY can't establish that fact they are starting off on possibly a wrong premise.

What is established in my opinion is that the pillowcase sample is not one of the twins and that whomever the pillowcase belongs to it matches the parental control sample. That is all.

The ex FSS had ( and SY should still should have ) Madeleine's provenanced Nuclear DNA sample ( the heel stick test - blood spot in a cardboard frame ) as a much better example of DNA to test against. As far as I know this has never been cross referenced with the parental control sample and or the Renault Scenic and forensic evidence taken from 5a.

Therefore in my view it is crucial to make sure via these forensic evidences taken from 5a that Madeleine was indeed in 5a in order to be taken. If not SY and the PJ only have subjective evidence ( words)  to go off not objective ( forensic ) evidence to make sure that they are not being led a merry dance.

All opinion though.
+1 XTC like your posts.

sar

Posts : 467
Reputation : 141
Join date : 2013-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Verdi on 28.05.15 12:30

@sar wrote:
@XTC wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@sharonl wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Joss wrote:What is so unreal about all of the baby checking b.s., is how on earth would anyone take such a huge risk with their babies when there were babysitters available and would have been way more risk free and given the parents peace of mind to enjoy some time child free with the other adults. Why on earth would they do such a thing? Talk about courting disaster, they sure did, and that makes no sense whatsoever with such very young children. Seems like their parental responsibilities flew out the door. And i don't believe the nonsense about "it was so safe", it was not safe what they did, and those people are doctors, SMH.
My thoughts exactly Joss!  Apart from the ridiculous notion that anyone would consider actually do something so irresponsible and reckless (even though they were so into each other ???), how can you enjoy a meal when up and down like a yoyo every fifteen minutes.  No wonder Gerry took indigestion medication with him, all that gyrating about must play havoc with semi-digested sardines and local belly wash.
Exactly Verdi. I don't think the tapas lot were even all best buds of the McC's were they? I think the McC's were good friends with the Payne's and i'm not sure about any of the others? And that is why non of it makes sense to cover up & lie in a missing child case for the McC's. No decent person would do such a thing.

I have to agree with you on the best buddies point, so why then, when the rest of the party were enjoying their lunch break on the Paynes' balcony, where the McCanns eating in their own apartment which was just below, in the early part of the holiday?

Further to this, why were the shutters closed in the kids room during the days? Kate contradicts herself in saying that she wanted to keep the heat out, but later says that the room wasn't used during the day and it was cold in there at night.
Hi sharonl, The stories we have heard about in this case have more twists & turns than a game of snakes & ladders, and seems an exercise to deliberately mislead everyone that questions Madeleine's fate.
What i find difficult to believe also is the fact there was no DNA of Maddie's in the holiday apartment, apart from what the dogs detected. Didn't one of the McC's have to go back to the family home in the U.K. to obtain a sample of Maddie's DNA? Surely if the little girl was on holiday with her family in PdL there would be DNA of hers in that apartment, on cuddle cat & her pillow & blanket? Funny how K. Mc washed Maddie's cuddle cat, and how the dogs alerted to the cat and other McC items for cadaver evidence. If that isn't suspicious i don't know what is.
These are very good points re: who knew who and in my humble opinion Mr Payne is the conduit for some reason.

If I'm correct he was the facilitator of the group coming together. He is allegedly the one who took all the deposits and booked the holiday for at least 8 of the nine ( Diane Webster was an addition apparently).

I have always had the feeling that they really didn't know each other between the 9 very well at all save the McCanns and the Paynes. This holiday was the first time they all met up I think.

This is only an opinion of course.

Vis: the DNA - This is and for my money has been a curious aspect of the whole case for the simple reason that surely it is necessary to establish as to whether Madeleine was in 5a in order to be removed by anyone? If the PJ couldn't or SY can't establish that fact they are starting off on possibly a wrong premise.

What is established in my opinion is that the pillowcase sample is not one of the twins and that whomever the pillowcase belongs to it matches the parental control sample. That is all.

The ex FSS had ( and SY should still should have ) Madeleine's provenanced Nuclear DNA sample ( the heel stick test - blood spot in a cardboard frame ) as a much better example of DNA to test against. As far as I know this has never been cross referenced with the parental control sample and or the Renault Scenic and forensic evidence taken from 5a.

Therefore in my view it is crucial to make sure via these forensic evidences taken from 5a that Madeleine was indeed in 5a in order to be taken. If not SY and the PJ only have subjective evidence ( words)  to go off not objective ( forensic ) evidence to make sure that they are not being led a merry dance.

All opinion though.
+1 XTC like your posts.
I quite agree, very good points raised by XTC.

John Lowe FSS witness deposition of 18th July 2008:


On 8 August 2007, the Forensic Science Service(R) received a piece of cloth/cotton wool (object MJN994) from Leicestershire Constabulary. That object was inside a sealed package.

On 12 October 2007, the Forensic Science Service(R) received a blood spot in a cardboard frame (object JRB/1) from Leicestershire Constabulary. That object was inside a sealed package.
~~~~~~

It has been said (although I don't believe there is any definitive proof) that Gerry collected the pillow case from their home in Rothley when he took his first trip back to the UK in May 2007.  The same trip I think that produced the infamous 'last photograph'.  (Busy busy!)

Now, if the pillow case was forensically examined by the Portuguese lab to determine a reference sample of Madeleine's DNA (there seemingly being a total absence of articles to analyze in apartment 5a). why was it deemed necessary to match it against another reference sample five months later?  If the reason for identifying Madeleine's DNA in the first place was to match against other samples collected at the crime scene for elimination purposes, which seems most likely, why the necessity for Gerry to visit his home to find something that might have been used by Madeleine and could also be contaminated?  Was it appropriately collected and conveyed in a sealed package, or did he stuff in his backpack along with other convenience memorabilia for later use?  Same old question I know but so far it hasn't been answered to my knowledge.

I'm still niggled about that blood spot in cardboard frame that seemed to appear out of nowhere.  Guthrie cards are retained by health authorities and are used exclusively for medical purposes, not law enforcement agencies.  I understand if the police want access to a stored Guthrie card they need to apply through a court of law.  I don't recall ever seeing anything to indicate this happening.  No, the blood spot in cardboard frame appeared with no reference as to it's origin.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

Verdi

Posts : 3771
Reputation : 2208
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Rufus T on 28.05.15 12:57

Also a Guthrie card would normally have 4 blood spots on it as far as I am aware.

Rufus T

Posts : 269
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-06-18
Location : Glasgow

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by joyce1938 on 28.05.15 13:12

Yes folks ,there is a definite problem with getting any of us now to accept wgat we have been told etc etc . I just cant see where we can go with this How can it be proven ?I think it had been said that the partment 5a had been very well cleaned before any tests and even place may not have been checked for much ,I may be wrong ,but over the years you begin to get some of it muddled I am sad to say. good to have few folk now speaking about it again,maybe we will get it sorted what had happened . Yes gmac was said to have collected pillowcase taken from child bed and it wasn't twins bed . ofcourse maybe police should have gone in and accompanied him ,but dare say that did not happen ,well ofcourse we don't know .. keep going we may get some proof one day and all will add up . joyce1938

joyce1938

Posts : 807
Reputation : 87
Join date : 2010-04-20
Age : 78
Location : england

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Verdi on 28.05.15 15:01

@Rufus T wrote:Also a Guthrie card would normally have 4 blood spots on it as far as I am aware.
How right you are!


____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

Verdi

Posts : 3771
Reputation : 2208
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Verdi on 28.05.15 15:15

@joyce1938 wrote:Yes folks ,there is a definite problem with getting any of us now to accept wgat we have been told etc etc . I just cant see where we can go with this How can it be proven ?I think it had been said that the partment 5a had been very well cleaned before any tests and even place may not have been checked for much ,I may be wrong ,but over the years you begin to get some of it muddled I am sad to say. good to have few folk now speaking about it again,maybe we will get it sorted what had happened . Yes gmac was said to have collected pillowcase taken from child bed and it wasn't twins bed . ofcourse maybe police should have gone in and accompanied him ,but dare say that did not happen ,well ofcourse we don't know .. keep going we may get some proof one day and all will add up . joyce1938
The magnificent duo Eddie and Keela had a good old sniff around apartment 5a and detected stuff they are trained to detect, with a great deal of reliability I might add.

Stands to reason in my opinion that under such circumstances as Eddie and Keela thought likely, the first obvious move in panic state would be operation clean-up - whatever day or hour it may have been.

Indeed the police (Leicestershire?) might have been with him but remember the press were hot on his tail, so to speak, so I'm sure that would have been yet another ideal opportunity for a photo shoot and favourable narrative.  Can't you just picture it ...  'grieving parent of missing toddler Maddie, forced to return to family home to collect something belonging to his beloved daughter because bungling disgraced Portuguese cop messed up vital forensic evidence'.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

Verdi

Posts : 3771
Reputation : 2208
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

crying incident

Post by willowthewisp on 28.05.15 15:39

Verdi
Questions need to be asked as to why the Police had destroyed the DNA samples collected from Apartment 5a Ocean Club where Madeleine was supposed to have gone missing from?
Surely it is not Police protocol to destroy evidence of DNA from files where people are still not found and could be used as a means to identify for the future reference?

willowthewisp

Posts : 1396
Reputation : 529
Join date : 2015-05-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Verdi on 28.05.15 21:56

@willowthewisp wrote:Verdi
Questions need to be asked as to why the Police had destroyed the DNA samples collected from Apartment 5a Ocean Club where Madeleine was supposed to have gone missing from?
Surely it is not Police protocol to destroy evidence of DNA from files where people are still not found and could be used as a means to identify for the future reference?
The self-proclaimed experts will have you believe that the FSS examination of forensic evidence was totally above board and in accord with established protocol, whether that attitude is pure personified arrogance or an attempt to stifle discussion on the subject I know not, or probably a bit of each.  I'm inclined to think the latter for the simple reason that, unless any one person claiming to know better than the rest actually worked in the FSS laboratories and were directly involved with the forensic analysis, I don't see how they can presume to know better than the rest - it's tantamount to text book spiel as opposed to the experience of real life.  

It would be an act of extreme naivety to believe the FSS are incorruptible, past knowledge of the internal workings of the establishment are testament to their dubious modus operandi.  What of Leicestershire Constabulary?  Their involvement in the case right from the start is shrouded in mystery, regularly fluctuating between plausible and downright suspicious.

We have Lowe of the FSS and Stuart call me Stu Prior of the LP and what a cosy twosome they make.  Like many others I don't understand the Portuguese language nor do I know anything about their law, so have been reliant on the UK information feed since square one (sorry, until the PJ files were released).  Not to say I believed much of it reported by the UK press but there was no official source of information forthcoming from Portugal to counter the UK slant.  Could this be the primary reason for the McCanns personal vendetta against Dr. Amaral?  Because he is the 'real deal' and is prepared to risk all in the name of justice?  Makes more sense than the McCanns winging on about harming the search and causing them deep distress, neither of which has ever been proven.

So, apart from the FSS lab technicians who were just doing their job, what is there to convince the sceptics that all was above board?   John Lowe's report?  What stands out for me, out of all the samples submitted for analysis, not one single result was a positive to assist the investigation.  Does that sound right to anyone?  Lowe's report specifically states that certain samples constitute a potential health risk which are destroyed after a certain length of time, unless application is made for preservation.  This in my opinion subtly puts the onus on the Portuguese police by implication - another area that's made this case so confusing, batting the ball between the UK and Portugal - or to put it simply UK protocol v. Portuguese protocol and never the twain shall meet.

Next question.  Why oh why was it necessary for a UK laboratory to analyze forensic samples collected by and associated with a crime committed in Portugal?  I know Dr. Amaral suggested it was a kind of insurance to curb accusations of bias against Portugal but why the UK?  More particularly, why the FSS?  The feigned experts insist it was because the FSS was the leading authority on complicated DNA/forensic analysis but they fell down dramatically in this case didn't they?  Taken into consideration with their short life span and one or two rather embarrassing incidents where they got it wrong - say no more?

So yes willowthewisp I think you're right, someone needs to be asking some very pertinent questions.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

Verdi

Posts : 3771
Reputation : 2208
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by sharonl on 28.05.15 23:31

@Joss wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Joss wrote:What is so unreal about all of the baby checking b.s., is how on earth would anyone take such a huge risk with their babies when there were babysitters available and would have been way more risk free and given the parents peace of mind to enjoy some time child free with the other adults. Why on earth would they do such a thing? Talk about courting disaster, they sure did, and that makes no sense whatsoever with such very young children. Seems like their parental responsibilities flew out the door. And i don't believe the nonsense about "it was so safe", it was not safe what they did, and those people are doctors, SMH.
My thoughts exactly Joss!  Apart from the ridiculous notion that anyone would consider actually do something so irresponsible and reckless (even though they were so into each other ???), how can you enjoy a meal when up and down like a yoyo every fifteen minutes.  No wonder Gerry took indigestion medication with him, all that gyrating about must play havoc with semi-digested sardines and local belly wash.
Exactly Verdi. I don't think the tapas lot were even all best buds of the McC's were they? I think the McC's were good friends with the Payne's and i'm not sure about any of the others? And that is why non of it makes sense to cover up & lie in a missing child case for the McC's. No decent person would do such a thing.

An extract from Jane Tanners statement (yes, I know) of 10th May 2007:

 
She met her companion/husband Russell O'Brien about 10/11 years ago having begun to live with him as his wife a short time after.
 
About 4 years before, through her companion Russell O'Brien, who at that time was a colleague of Gerald (Gerry) McCann (father of Madeleine Beth McCann), she met the McCann couple. One of the reasons for the closeness between the two couples, besides the professional acquaintance, both Russell O'Brien and Gerald McCann are medical doctors, was the fact they have children, Madeleine Beth McCann and E**a O'Brien, of approximately the same age. Another very important reason was the fact that Fiona Payne is a common friend of both couples (Fiona Payne worked with Kate Healy McCann), she having facilitated the relationship.
 
As for meeting with the McCanns she said sporadic meetings have already occurred between the group, recalling that the first trip they made together was when Fiona and David Payne were married in Italy in August 2003. She thinks that all the people in the present group were at the wedding recalling that the McCanns, at that time, had only one child (the missing Madeleine Beth McCann).
 
Since she became a mother (of E**a O'Brien, almost 4 years old), she went to Italy to the above wedding; to Germany to visit a friend (a former colleague of Russell, named B.D. - she was a trainee at the place where her husband worked in England). Also she went to Australia in Nov/Dec 2006 for six weeks. On that trip she went with only her companion and the two girls.
 
In May 2005 she was in Greece for one week with Russell and her daughter. It was the first time they travelled using the Mark Warner agency.
 
Also they had had holidays in England in August 2004 (Cornwall) and April 2006 (Longleat nature reserve). Those holidays were spent solely with David and Fiona Payne, and their respective children.
 
With the McCanns they began to meet at parties, for example weddings and birthdays. She met Kate Healy's mother, whose name she does not recall, on Madeleine Beth McCann's third birthday last year, but she didn't get to know any of the other McCann family members, knowing that both had siblings but not knowing other details.
 
This was the first time that all four couples had holidayed together.
 
She knows that, in Sept 2005, the McCanns and the Paynes holidayed together in Majorca, she [and Russell] not having joined them because of her advanced state of pregnancy.
 
The deponent was in Portugal three time before. The first was some eight years ago and the the second five years ago, both with her husband in Albufeira and both were holidays. The third time in January 2004 was for work near Vilamoura. She came to organise an event for the company where she worked, "Fisher Sientific" in Leicester.

____________________
"WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER" - Rebekah Brooks to David Cameron

sharonl


Posts : 3609
Reputation : 438
Join date : 2009-12-29

View user profile http://www.cold2012.org.uk

Back to top Go down

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

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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