Carte Blanche: Chat Room To Discuss Alternative Theory

by Bill101 13.08.22 15:20

Ok, bear with me as I know this is a loose theory and I’m in no way presenting enough evidence to substantiate it. It’s based on the fact I think the group tell some parts of the truth but in the wrong order and have a need to over explain certain things.

M dies Sunday or Monday in Russell o briens apartment. I don’t believe they were leaving the children alone and in the pj files I think they suggested the children were left in one apartment together each night. This also accounts for the evening ‘illnesses’ the adults suffered resulting in someone being away from the table each night to provide childcare in one single apartment. I think cat baker had been asked directly to baby sit for them outside of the mark Warner service for extra cash which is why they never requested it.

On the night in question m was tired due to illness. I think she was sedated for sleep and vomited. This explain Russell o briens need to explain washing of bed sheets and vomiting etc. but also why he never requested more sheets. this also explains the brown stain on m plans top as Kate said she’d given them chocolate before bed.

Cat isn’t checking on the children much and doenst notice m has died. The parents return and discover what has happened.

No one wants to admit to procuring or administering sedatives or to lose their children. as all the doctors livelihoods would be at risk. Cat can never work with children if the truth comes out. All parties are incentivised to lie. They all lie badly. Likely all helping to dispose of evidence here and there. The boat story stands out as nonsense where someone fell in the water but this is likely over explained to account for changes of clothes etc as clothes were probably dumped overboard and new ones put on.

The body is removed to the McCanns apt and put in a cupboard in their bedroom. This explains why everyone slept next door as who wants to sleep in the same room as a corpse and so the bed musical chairs began.

The corpse is then moved into the blue bag and hidden behind the sofa before being frozen elsewhere.

The cadaverine in the hire car comes from the freezer defrosting in transport when they disposed of it rather than an actual corpse in the car.

I wish we knew what happened! Thoughts? Counter suggestions?

by Verdi 13.08.22 16:30

Bill101

by Bill101 13.08.22 18:31

Hi and thanks :)
Sorry to just run in with a theory but I’ve seen the work of Richard hall and Peter Hyatt and I believe the principles of ‘lying with the truth’. The tapas 7 seem to relay some seemingly innocuous details in depth which makes me think they are anything but innocuous.
Anyway interested in thoughts, anything to corroborate or contradict this one?

by Scansally 16.08.22 14:46

It’s always stuck me as strange that a child was crying for so long without anyone noticing. However stranger still is the fact the child was crying ‘daddy’. Or so we are led to believe. What if in fact the child was crying ‘maddie’. In that the child crying (Amelie) was either trying to attract attention for assistance having found maddie dead or injured that night OR she was already deceased beforehand and Amelie woke up upset looking for her?

Just a thought but a distressed child crying maddie could sound like daddy and this may explain the maccans bizarre assertion they ‘never called her maddie’. Also children in distress typically cry mummy (not 100%) but it’s less common to cry for the father when I’ll or distressed.

by Verdi 16.08.22 14:58

Scansally

You might find this of interest..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Milo 17.08.22 8:08

According to Chessmaster (4), "Madeleines body is buried near that church I’m very sure of this because this was well planned they new and also from a human beings perspective them also been the parents with feelings not like a serial killer or something. So there’s no way they burned her and there’s no way they would of tossed her off cliffs or in wells. I believe they disposed of her with respect and good planning."

When methods for disposal of Madeleine's body have been discusssed on this forum and in many publications relating to the McCann case, I have found it difficult to accept that any parent, even nasty conniving people like Kate and Gerry McCann, would dispose of their child's body in a rough or disrespectful way, such as the oft-mentioned tossing from cliff (admittedly there are many cliffs in the Argave) or into a well (and there are lots of them not too far from the Ocean Club). I assume that burning as in cremation according to the rules of a church or country is taken to be respectful. Not so the suggestion by others on this forum over the years that she was cremated with/under another body lying in the little church in Praia de Luz that Gerry and Kate visited so often, reportedly with key, to pray.

I have not considered the notion of burial "near the church" but will be interested to read comments about it. I am aware of discussions about Madeleine being cremated with another body lying in the church. I would put that in the category of disrespectful. However, there might be something in Madeleine's body lying there hidden from view until taken to be buried near the church rather than being cremated with the other body. (Whose body was it btw?) Each of the hypotheses about church burial/cremation involve complex planning and the contribution of people outside the Tapas 9.
mc

I am finding it interesting to revisit some of the themes in Madeleine's story and consider them using a different lens. Thanks to all.

by Milo 17.08.22 8:09

Dear Gang

Please excuse needless repetition in my previous posting.

by crusader 17.08.22 9:24

The burial near a church, is not beyond belief, I don't believe it's the church in PDL though., it could be any church.
The McCann's behaviour in front of the cameras indicates they had come to terms with what happened to Madeleine and said their final goodbyes.

by Verdi 17.08.22 13:12

The interesting thing is, in my view, the focus on Gerry and Kate McCann from the very beginning - the morning of 4th May 2007, when the news first hit the headlines.

The press followed them about like hungry wolves, their every move was videoed, monitored and reported across world headlines - this is not normal. Has any other missing child case received so much media attention, I mean on an hourly/daily/weekly basis not an occasional report as and when a case investigation develops. In more recent decades, I think social media takes more interest in missing children generally.

So, whilst the McCanns built their bastion of protection - courtesy of the media and press, who knows what was going on behind the scenes. Family and friends were coming and going in a constant stream of support, Sandy Cameron was said to have used the hired Renault Scenic as was the enigmatic bit part player, Michael Wright.

And then to further confound the issue we have this which is inconsistent with the expected behaviour of a grieving parent..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Scansally 22.08.22 22:47

I have a question and I think (hope) this is the right place to put it. :)
On reading a few McCann assertions there are several events that appear evidently fabricated/out of place. Several events seem over explained in the interests of presupposing questions or evidence that is yet to be discovered.
One which I’m curious about is that of the alleged dog bite KM suffered on her run prior to Madeleines disappearance.
Does anyone know if this was a genuine event or for what purpose this narrative was produced? It appears an unlucky event to befall her yet again…...

by Verdi 23.08.22 1:34

The only reference to the bitey doggy I'm aware of is from Kate McCann herself in her autobiographical novel 'madeleine'.

Wednesday, 2 May 2007. Our last completely happy day. Our last, to date, as a family of five. If only it was possible to rewind. Even for an hour.

Today it rained. The children went to their clubs, but our tennis lessons were postponed. Instead we joined Fiona, David and Dianne at the Millennium restaurant for coffee. We then returned to our apartment and a little while later I left again, to go for a run with Matt. I’d bought a new pair of running shoes a few days before we’d left for Portugal and they were certainly getting a good initiation. They were pink, which I wasn’t quite sure about – I wondered how seriously a runner in pink trainers could be taken – but after a few outings in the sand they weren’t looking quite so glaring and girly. As we ran along the promenade, a small dog jumped out from under a bench and attacked my right calf. It was pretty sore and I was a bit shaken, but I carried on as coolly as I could manage. Maybe he just didn’t like those pink trainers.

I can't imagine why Ms McCann bothers to mention such a minor incident which doesn't appear to have relevance to anything apart from her pink trainers. I'm certain the incident has never been mentioned elsewhere but then, the book is packed out with mawkish twaddle to tug at the holiday makers sun lounger heart strings.

Errant dogs from my experience get agitated by locomotion, be it a passing pair of legs or a motorised vehicle - the former they chase and gnash at the leg, the latter they chase and gnash at the wheels.

A non event methinks.

by crusader 23.08.22 7:24

It makes you wonder if the dog bite incident was to explain any blood odour found by the dogs.

If indeed the dog drew blood, or even if there was a dog, there is no sign of injury in any photos I've seen of Kate.

Matt Oldfield mentioned the run in his rogatory statement, but he didn't say anything about a dog attacking Kate.

by CaKeLoveR 23.08.22 7:31

I agree; another instance of retro fitting, like the tea stain. And the horrifying remark about Madeleine's body, to cover anything which could be discovered if she should be found.

by Scansally 23.08.22 8:50

Ah brilliant thanks! Yes it is a weird detail and the narrative arc is somewhat lacking- we are led to believe a random dog jumps out and bites her. No discourse with the owner follows even to question why rabid beasts are roaming the exceptionally safe holiday destination of PdL

and no second thoughts about it, she just continues to jog on with her usual stony comportment 🤭
Just feels out of place but I agree it’s likely just padding for the book, or embellished detail to show how ‘’truthful’ the book is as even the most seemingly insignificant details are shared. Yawn 🥱

by CaKeLoveR 23.08.22 9:45

It probably didn't happen, or the self described 'responsible parent' would have warned holiday makers of this notoriously unreliable dog. Wouldn't she?

by Verdi 23.08.22 12:57

If there be any truth whatsoever in this vicious dog leg attack, rather than waiting four years to mention in her novel, it would have been wise for her to rush to the nearest medical centre for a round of rabies injections.

As a practicing GP with extensive medical knowledge, she should be aware of the dangers.

by Scansally 23.08.22 13:38

Yes curiously in 10th May interview Matt states - on a date he does not recall for sure but on one day in the past week during which it rained in PdL (thinking it was 2 May, the day before the disappearance) he went on a 40-minute run on the streets around the resort together with KM.

He then mentions no run at all with KM on 3rd May yet details a flurry of activities that would have left no time for a run…..

The dog bite could just be a bizarre fantasy on behalf of KM or alibi building. I’m going to find that missing hours thread again!

God it gets depressing reading the accounts, dog bites, burglars grappling with octogenarians on balconies and strange people lurking on every corner it’s a wonder anyone felt safe let alone left children unattended!

It would be laughable reading some of these mendacious accounts were it not for the fact they are devised to mislead our understanding around the disappearance of an innocent child :-/

by Scansally 23.08.22 13:40

Oh no wait I got my dates mixed up ignore me they do corroborate running on 2nd not 3rd doh! 🤪 reading too much

by Verdi 23.08.22 14:02

I don't think dogs make very good alibis - ask Eddie and Keela they would know, they were there.

by Scansally 23.08.22 14:09

Gosh you’re right I should have just asked the dog! Wink

by Milo 24.08.22 17:31

I believe the doggy bite story was yet another of Kate's pre-emptive strikes. Therefore, we need to work out why she found it necessary to write about something so trivial?

Probably because it was not so trivial after all...

This was Wednesday 2nd. It rained.

The "children" went to their clubs. They were not mentioned by name or number.

The Lobsters' sailing excursion for Wednesday morning was postponed to Thursday morning (as per the week's timetable - typed version with hand-written arrow to show this change; time allotted now half-hour less).

Tennis lessons were postponed (for Gerry, Kate and others).

Kate said she hung about.

"We" (presumably Kate and Gerry) went to the Millennium restaurant for coffee with Fiona & David Payne and Dianne (Fiona's mother). Why just the Payne family?

Kate and Gerry returned to their apartment (5A) after coffee. Kate left the apartment [again] "a little while" after that. What did Gerry do - no tennis, no Kate, no kids? Did he stay in the apartment or did he go out? If so, where and for how long?

Kate and Matt went for a run. Kate no longer felt so girly now that her new glaring pink trainers, acquired before the trip, had been initiated after "a few outings in the sand". Why was Kate so keen to mention the colour, the initiation and the running surface?

Then the drama began - small dog jumped out from under a bench on the promenade and attacked Kate's right calf. Kate self-reported as sore, shaken and carrying on. Kate writes about the specific part of her leg that was attacked: not merely her leg but her right leg and not just her right leg but the calf of her right leg!

Why was Kate so specific about the part of her body that the dog "attacked"?

Three-eighths of the story was about the doggie drama, and concluded with more drivel about the pink trainers.

Is there something significant about those pink trainers?
For example if a person wearing pink trainers was mentioned in a report or statement, would the link to Kate be made?

by Scansally 24.08.22 18:58

It does seem a strange and highly specific event which she is intent on mentioning.
Perhaps there was blood or bodily fluid on the running clothes. A need to explain sand being found on her trainers is less likely as any beach runner would have sand coated soles.
So indeed she over reports something, the one thing I do find about the entire group is that they are not accomplished liars. Often their farcical and over egged tales actually draw attention to things rather than sating peoples curiosity.
Most things they mention only raise more questions

‍�