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 start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Pat Brown's blog

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by Meagain on 15.07.12 22:20

May I play devil's advocate for a moment.

If they ignore this man Birch and don't ask for the Murat's garden to be dug up, it seems it's because they don't care about her. On the other hand if they were to manage to persuade the Police to dig there and no body was found, what are the chances that somebody somewhere would accuse them of knowing that she wasn't there in the first place because they had hidden her body elsewhere?

Doesn't it seem as if this scenario, created by Mr Birch, his snoopery machine and his apparent reluctance to deal with "his findings" in a discreet and professional way, has created a situation where they will be damned if they do and damned if they don't?

K.

Meagain

Posts : 28
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-06-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by uppatoffee on 15.07.12 22:28

@Meagain wrote:May I play devil's advocate for a moment.

If they ignore this man Birch and don't ask for the Murat's garden to be dug up, it seems it's because they don't care about her. On the other hand if they were to manage to persuade the Police to dig there and no body was found, what are the chances that somebody somewhere would accuse them of knowing that she wasn't there in the first place because they had hidden her body elsewhere?

Doesn't it seem as if this scenario, created by Mr Birch, his snoopery machine and his apparent reluctance to deal with "his findings" in a discreet and professional way, has created a situation where they will be damned if they do and damned if they don't?

K.

I think its a lot more telling that they haven't asked for it to be dug up. If they are innocent then they have no reason to fear anything being found in Murat's yard and should be shouting from the rooftops for the path to be dug up just in case it might bring closure to the whole sorry saga. I suspect that the PJ/SY are doing their own investigations in a completely different location while watching the McCann's actions with interest.

uppatoffee

Posts : 626
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-09-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by Meagain on 15.07.12 22:42

I think that if I was in their shoes, I might be inclined to ask for the garden to be dug up uppatoffee. I am not however, so can't be sure.

I just wonder if however they play it they will receive criticism from some quarters. You and I might think that they should ask for it to be dug because it would show that they truly were not leaving any stone unturned and if nothing was found we might be genuinely relieved for them and for Madeleine. The next two people, however, might jump on this and condemn them as knowing she wasn't there because they have hid her body elsewhere.

What chance do they have?

Meagain

Posts : 28
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-06-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by Cristobell on 15.07.12 22:47

I quite like Pat's openness and occasional dark humour. She is a brave woman to declare herself publicly, as a non believer, though maybe as a non resident of the UK, she appears to have more freedom of expression. I would love to have a conversation with her, off the record and over a glass of wine.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by uppatoffee on 15.07.12 22:51

People are always going to suspect their involvement in Madeleine's disappearance though due to the evidence, so really they have nothing to lose in my opinion.

If it was me in their shoes and I was innocent, I would just be so relieved after 5 years to be able to say proper a proper farewell if it was her. I imagine that for parents/relatives of missing people, it is the fear of the unknown that is the worst thing. The grieving process can at least begin if the body is located. Otherwise you would be forever watching and waiting and hoping that one day... It would destroy you.


uppatoffee

Posts : 626
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-09-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by Guest on 15.07.12 22:57

I'd think that the response of K&G to Birch's claim is going to be motivated by not wishing to say or do anything likely to annoy Murat and his family so close to the libel trial. I've no idea how likely the possibility could be, of course, but I'm sure K&G could do without Murat or anyone close to him either giving evidence against them in court, or giving ammunition to Amaral and his lawyers.

If they are going ahead with the libel claim, winning that is all that matters to them at the moment (in my opinion)

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by Cristobell on 15.07.12 23:00

From a body language perspective, Kate visibly flinched when asked about Stephen Birch. I would have expected a 'we need to know' tearful response. It could have been devised to take the sting out of Kate's new appointment. That is, to elicit sympathy, and drown out dissenting voices. It is also a news story with potential longevity. It can be dug out (forgive the pun) at any time as a future headline, eg. McCanns Proved Innocent AGAIN. Perhaps during a libel trial?

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by Willo on 15.07.12 23:14

In my opinion, however scant the evidence, if the parents felt there was the tiniest chance of closure they would be besieging the PJ, SY, Murat and whoever else would listen to them, to excavate under the path to find the truth. I myself feel 99.9% that no body will be found and I am at a loss to make any sense of the end motives of any of the players involved but this claim must be investigated.

As I think of the many times over the last five years or so I have thought this case cannot get any more bizarre, I actually chuckle to myself. Out of the blue a member of the public thousands of miles away pin points the exact burial place of Madeleine and after chasing all those vague sightings in all parts of the world the McCann's seem to show little or no interest in having a look see. How bizarre!

Willo

Posts : 141
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2011-05-24
Location : NZ

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by ShuBob on 15.07.12 23:22

For the McCanns, it's all about strategy. It would appear Birch jumped the gun after a potential agreement with Wyk to release the story in September. It's still possible that they'll come alive in September around the time of the libel trial and start making noises about Murat's garden being dug up. I wouldn't put it past them.

ShuBob

Posts : 1893
Reputation : 57
Join date : 2012-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by uppatoffee on 15.07.12 23:28

@ShuBob wrote:For the McCanns, it's all about strategy. It would appear Birch jumped the gun after a potential agreement with Wyk to release the story in September. It's still possible that they'll come alive in September around the time of the libel trial and start making noises about Murat's garden being dug up. I wouldn't put it past them.

Well if they do that I hope it backfires on them. That really will make it incredibly obvious what this is all about. Judging by Birch's post this afternoon, he seems to be trying to sabotage this cosy agreement, which suggests to me that he is of the opinion they are responsible. I think he has hinted at this all along, but has just been less subtle about it with each post.

uppatoffee

Posts : 626
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-09-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by FH on 31.07.12 0:00

Once again it seems actions (or the lack of) speak so much louder than words.

If it was my child that was missing and someone said they had found evidence of soil disturbance and possible remains close to where she went missing, I'd be on the first plane to Portugal and I'd start digging with my bare hands. If it was her I'd be devastated, but relieved to finally know what happened to her. If it wasn't her I'd be devastated, but relieved that she might still be out there somewhere alive. Either way I really wouldn't give a toss what the public and media thought my motives were.

FH

Posts : 118
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-04-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by Olive_Boyle on 31.07.12 0:09

Agree FH, exactly what I would do. And I'm sure so would any normal parent who had a missing child. I wouldn't give a toss about any consequences or upsetting anybody. If they can take seriously some nutter with a magic box, why wouldn't they take this, with so much more relevance seriously.

Off topic but its mentioned in this thread, so I'll ask my question here.

Is Murat taking someone to court in September for libel? And if he is, who? Thank you.

Olive_Boyle

Posts : 122
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-05-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by monkey mind on 31.07.12 10:35

I don't think Murat is taking anyone to court at the moment though his lawyer has intimatedthey may do with Mr Birch. I think that probably refers to the McCann Amaral hearing set for the autumn and the poster Tcat was insinuating that the McCanns would not wish to antagonise Murat prior to that hearing and risk bringing him out of the woodwork on behalf of the opposition....

monkey mind

Posts : 616
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2011-12-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by Nina on 31.07.12 12:06

@monkey mind wrote:I don't think Murat is taking anyone to court at the moment though his lawyer has intimatedthey may do with Mr Birch. I think that probably refers to the McCann Amaral hearing set for the autumn and the poster Tcat was insinuating that the McCanns would not wish to antagonise Murat prior to that hearing and risk bringing him out of the woodwork on behalf of the opposition....

Wasn't he taking Jane Tanner to court?

____________________
Not one more cent from me.

Nina

Posts : 2626
Reputation : 215
Join date : 2011-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by rainbow-fairy on 02.08.12 18:51

@russiandoll wrote: I second all you say Tigger
I third it russiandoll

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by rainbow-fairy on 02.08.12 18:52

@Willo wrote:In my opinion, however scant the evidence, if the parents felt there was the tiniest chance of closure they would be besieging the PJ, SY, Murat and whoever else would listen to them, to excavate under the path to find the truth. I myself feel 99.9% that no body will be found and I am at a loss to make any sense of the end motives of any of the players involved but this claim must be investigated.

As I think of the many times over the last five years or so I have thought this case cannot get any more bizarre, I actually chuckle to myself. Out of the blue a member of the public thousands of miles away pin points the exact burial place of Madeleine and after chasing all those vague sightings in all parts of the world the McCann's seem to show little or no interest in having a look see. How bizarre!

Willo, spot on

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by rainbow-fairy on 02.08.12 18:56

@pennylane wrote:I think Pat Brown deserves a great deal of respect. This lady flew all the way from California to Portugal, and spent a great deal of time assessing the local vicinity of where Madeleine went missing, and checking out the surrounding terrain and the area Mr Smith believed he saw Gerry McCann carrying Madeleine, and much, much more. She is not just an armchair critic, she has proven she cares.

I hope she is able to go back to Portugal again in the near future and report back to us on her findings!

You rock Pat!

I think a fair point and I imagine Pat is completely frustrated at what appears to be a total disregard of the McCanns in the whole thing. At THE VERY LEAST, IF we believe there was neglect then they are culpable. If OTOH there was no neglect then things are worse still...

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by aiyoyo on 03.08.12 11:11

Let me put it this way - the mccanns knew exactly where they laid Madeleine to rest, so their refusal to heed Stephen Birch's claim is no surprise.

If she was indeed under Murat's driveway, all the more reason they are not interested in getting the backyard dig for obvious reason.
If she wasn't there which they already knew then it's only going to be a complete waste of time and resources.
I's very obvious why the mccanns dont give two monkeys about Birch's claim.

What is perplexing is why didn't Murat implore the PJ to come and dig up his backyard just to put the story to bed. There is no harm in that surely, just a bit of inconvenience that's all of having to put up with the digging activities. Plus he would be doing a decent citizen's duty of helping find Madeleine. Didn't he say in his post financial compensation from the Press that he hopes Madeleine is found.

Now I wonder what's stopping Murat or his mum for that matter from asking the PJ to come and dig up that contentious patch in question.



aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by Nina on 03.08.12 11:32

@aiyoyo wrote:Let me put it this way - the mccanns knew exactly where they laid Madeleine to rest, so their refusal to heed Stephen Birch's claim is no surprise.

If she was indeed under Murat's driveway, all the more reason they are not interested in getting the backyard dig for obvious reason.
If she wasn't there which they already knew then it's only going to be a complete waste of time and resources.
I's very obvious why the mccanns dont give two monkeys about Birch's claim.

What is perplexing is why didn't Murat implore the PJ to come and dig up his backyard just to put the story to bed. There is no harm in that surely, just a bit of inconvenience that's all of having to put up with the digging activities. Plus he would be doing a decent citizen's duty of helping find Madeleine. Didn't he say in his post financial compensation from the Press that he hopes Madeleine is found.

Now I wonder what's stopping Murat or his mum for that matter from asking the PJ to come and dig up that contentious patch in question.



Not excusing the lack of asking just a thought that maybe the first time they entered the Murat's villa and gardens they caused a lot of mess, damage and expense to rectify. I remember them draining the pool, now maybe not a big deal, but to replace the water, if in fact water was available would have been very costly. The shrubs and trees were also cut back. Yes maybe could have done with a prune, but they were not pruned they were hacked back. Now that is there home, possibly not the most landscaped of gardens, but their home nevertherless and there was a lot of upheaval.
I would love for the McCanns Rothley place to have received the same attention, Kate would have thrown a right wobbler.
Honestly I am not making any excuses. A child is worth far more than a garden or a swimming pool, I am merely pointing out what it would mean from a householder's point of view.
Of course the chance that there is something there hence the reticence.

____________________
Not one more cent from me.

Nina

Posts : 2626
Reputation : 215
Join date : 2011-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by aiyoyo on 04.08.12 6:53

If she is there as alleged then the PJ would be there in a flash to dig up doesn't matter the mess or inconvenience to the householder in question. I am inclined to think the PJ know more than revealed.

This case is not going to be solved by going round digging up Murat's backyard just on Birch say on, and in the process make a complete fool of yourself. Of course if Birch can put more meat on his bone (other than his equipment detected something there) then it might be a completely different story.

The best bet to progress is to haul the Mccanns and T7 back to get them to answer questions and to do a reconstruction.









aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by ProfessorPPlum on 04.08.12 12:12

Let's imagine for a moment that the McCanns are telling the truth and there was and abductor around 9.15pm on 3rd May 2007. Even if that were the case they would be aware - as we all are - that it is statistically vastly more likely that Madeleine was killed soon after and disposed of.

Therefore you'd think that someone independent claiming to have spent a considerable amount of money on research that confirms this statistical probability would have to be taken seriously - but the McCanns ignore it. Why? Because it doesn't fit with their version of reality. By definition, a victim has no control of what happens to them. Why also are McCanns are so certain about what did and didn't happen to Madeleine before, during and after she was 'taken' from their care?

From the start, the McCanns have devoted all their energies to imposing their version of reality on this situation. What victim does this? They seem to have little or no idea what their obsession reveals about them to a watching world. To me it's the hallmark of the liar.

ProfessorPPlum

Posts : 411
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-05-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by russiandoll on 06.09.12 22:59

dated today on her blog :

The concept of Occam's Razor, that the simplest explanation is likely to be true, is useful when analyzing the case of missing Madeleine McCann. With Scotland Yard having flushed millions of pounds of British taxpayer's money down the toilet in an effort to promote the most ludicrous of theories (in complete opposition to Occam's Razor), I want to step back to the night of May 3, 2007 and examine the simplest of answers.


Why did the McCanns leave Madeleine and her siblings alone in the vacation apartment evening after evening?

Because they were not worried that anyone would get into the apartment or that the children would get out.

Why were they not worried that anyone would get into the apartment or that the children would get out?

Because the apartment was thoroughly locked down so that it would be extremely difficult for anyone to get in or for the children to get out.

As then it would be routine for the McCanns to lock down the apartment when they went to the Tapas bar in the evening, would it be likely that they would change their routine on the evening of May 3, 2007 and leave the doors unlocked so that someone could get in or that one of their children could get out?

No.

Therefore, it is most likely that the apartment was locked down on May 3, 2007.

Yes.

Oh.


Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

September 6, 2012

____________________



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


russiandoll

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by Guest on 06.09.12 23:02

That's my girl ...

ETA the mantra: no neglect = no abduction

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by Ross on 07.09.12 0:57

Pat's original comments, and the discussion in this thread thereafter is all based on one assumption - that there is a body. However, as long ago as September 2007, McCann said "Find the body and prove we killed her." This is an extremely confident statement, and it is possible that his confidence stems from knowing that there is no body. We know the Foreign Office was on the scene immediately in the shape of the Ambassador and consular staff, and a government spin doctor flown out from London. With this level of interest it is naive not to assume that other, covert, FO employees were also despatched to the scene, and one thing spooks can do is make a corpse disappear when required.

With no body it is very difficult to make a case stick, so disposing of it permanently would be a logical step.

____________________
"Believe nothing, no matter where you heard it, no matter who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense."

Buddha

Ross

Posts : 205
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2011-12-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Pat Brown's blog

Post by aiyoyo on 07.09.12 1:46

You don't need a body to prove homicide, just evidence.
There is overwhelming evidence Maddie died in the apt.
Take away the unusual elements in the case - pressure from extra helping hands and spin - ordinarily case like this will make it to court and someone tried for the homicide even sans body.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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