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

Do they think we are stupid??!

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by piglet1 on 12.02.13 13:22

Now for one if I was on the position of my child being abducted and I was innocent in it and dogs alerted to blood and cadaver my first thought would be panic that the abductors had done something to my child in the apartment...am I alone in this or would others do the same?

I wouldn't just dismiss out of hand and say that dogs especially trained as well as Eddie and Keela would falsely alert...

This is a huge red flag in itself (their reaction to it!)

piglet1

Posts : 2
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by happychick on 12.02.13 13:59

That's exactly what I think innocent parents would do.

And then if those same innocent parents hired a car 3 weeks later and cadaver scent was found in there too, then heck does anyone really think they would make excuses for the alerts by saying it was dirty nappies?

Come on, McCanns, pull the other one.

Welcome piglet1 welcome

____________________


happychick

Posts : 400
Reputation : 36
Join date : 2011-06-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by guest. on 12.02.13 15:38

This was my personal turning point of being sure they knew what had happened to M

Although they had said and done some bizarre things that bothered me, especially the first couple of tv appearances, I gave them the benefit of the doubt

But this totally struck me that it was so obvious that if they really didn't know what had happened to M and the PJ backed by UK forensics told them she had been transported in the hire car any innocent parent would have been handing them a list of all known drivers and people who had the opportunity to take the keys i.e. cleaners etc and demanding they looked into who had it the week she went missing

The only reason to throw out excuses for these findings is to cover guilt or you know what happened and that wasn't it so you know it's an error, no other reason is viable. So either way IMO they knew

guest.

Posts : 322
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2011-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by tigger on 12.02.13 16:51

Here is the relevant article: with thanks to McCannfiles.
By Dr Martin Roberts
15 September 2011

SOMETHING'S MISSING

An all-too-common discovery when opening last year's jig-saw puzzle at Christmas is that there's a piece missing. Sometimes, trying to do the same thing with the same pieces simply leads to a different outcome. Take for example this description by Kate McCann of husband Gerry's behaviour, from her bestseller, Madeleine:

"Gerry was distraught now. He was on his knees, sobbing, his head hung low."

Sounds familiar.

Compare it with this statement of Kate's from the televised documentary 'Madeleine Was Here' of two years ago:

"I think it's actually going through the scenario of that night as well, you know, errm... I mean, you know, even what I can remember of the night, you know, seeing Gerry, that distraught really, sobbing, on the floor."

Earlier this year, I asked the question, 'Which night?' (see article - Uneasy Lies The Head, McCannfiles, 3 July), there being no known circumstance in which Kate could have observed Gerry on the floor that night. Kate has, it seems, since decided that the night in question was the one on which the McCanns' Portuguese lawyer, Carlos Pinto de Abreu, proffered the 'deal' that wasn't.

That's handy. Now when people are formally called to account for the truth, rather than offer loose accounts of it, Carlos could be invited to confirm his recollection of a prostrate, sobbing Gerry McCann, reacting to his offer on behalf of the PJ.

Their nomination as 'core participants' in the Leveson inquiry suggests that someone considers the McCanns have something to say for themselves. Horses for courses then. When have the McCanns not had something to say? Oh, I remember. September 7, 2007. Whatever happened to, 'All I could do was to tell the police the truth - again - and hope that was what they were actually interested in.' (p.237)? That principle very soon went AWOL, didn't it?

There is something else missing from the story of the McCanns in Portugal; a certain emotional response. And by that I do not mean the disciplined withholding of tears on the advice of third-party experts (maybe 'cuddle cat' was preferred to a handkerchief for that very reason). What should have been in evidence, and was not, stems from an observation Kate herself makes on p.242 of her 'account:'

"Faced with something...way beyond the sphere of your experience, it is natural to dismiss it as impossible, but that doesn't mean it is."

Q: What, in particular, was beyond Kate (or even Gerry's) experience?

A: Sniffer dogs.

Speaking of (or rather denigrating) Ricardo Paiva, Kate comments, "What did he know about low-copy DNA?" (obviously not as much as she herself knew about Low Copy Number DNA - LCN for short). "These dogs had never been used in Portugal before." As if their noses had been detained on entry into the country.

Deliberately misleading waffle aside ("As we now know, the chemicals believed to create the 'odour of death', putrescence and cadaverine, last no longer than thirty days.") at the time when the McCanns were first confronted with the dogs' reactions within apartment 5A and to their personal effects exclusively, their understanding of the basis for the dogs' behaviour, the EVRD in particular was - zero, i.e., it was way beyond the sphere of their experience.

So, put yourself in the position of a parent who knows their child is asleep at 9.05 and, because someone else is convinced she saw it happen, carried off at 9.15. (When asked by reporter Sandra Felgueiras which of the many sightings of Madeleine 'touched' them most, Gerry, aiming for his ear no doubt, scratches the back of his neck, then answers: "The sightings on the night.").

As Kate's narrative goes: "Supposing she had been killed - and we think this extremely unlikely - she must have been taken out of the apartment within minutes." Kate "struggled to understand how, never mind why, somebody could have killed Madeleine and removed her body within such a short time frame." "Did they (the PJ) really believe that a dog could smell the 'odour of death' three months later from a body that had been removed so swiftly?"

Well yes, they did believe that, and with good reason. The self same dog had done it many times before, and over a longer interval. But Kate's emotions are the more important here. "...to me, as Madeleine's mother, it didn't have to make sense at this point. The merest suggestion from Ricardo that it was even possible she had been killed in that flat was like a knife being twisted into my chest."

First we should indeed 'mind why' somebody would have killed Madeleine and removed her body. The mantra from the word 'go' has been paedophilia not necrophilia. Unless the ultimate trade was in body parts, as opposed to child pornography, the abduction of a corpse will not have occurred. In any case, Madeleine was alive, wasn't she? So when, out of the blue, the Portuguese police presented the McCanns with indicators of a corpse having spent sufficient time inside apartment 5A as to leave a forensic trace, what was their reaction? Did Kate, as instinctive as the next person, exclaim exactly as you or I might have done in the circumstances, knowing that our sleeping child had disappeared within minutes? Did she, or Gerry, ever declare, "That's impossible!"?

Instructively, the McCanns reaction was not one of flabbergasted disbelief. On the contrary, and despite Kate McCann's account of her scepticism as regards the dogs' capabilities, we have the pair of them tacitly acknowledging the status quo. Gerry, whilst 'researching the validity of sniffer-dog evidence' announced that 'Seany' (Kate's term) had taken an unexpected fancy to sea-bass (potentially a source of cadaverine-like chemical odour). Were the McCanns accustomed to preparing their meals on (or, like Bedouin, eating them off) the floor? And how did the mobile corpse come to sprinkle its presence throughout the apartment; everywhere except for the very bedroom from which it was 'taken'? Then of course there is the issue of the hire car, and all manner of things transported in the spare wheel well! Kate, it was suggested, moonlighted in her beach wear as a mortician during her tenure as a locum G.P.

Despite Kate's 'holier-than-thou' posture in her discussion of the 'evidence' therefore, the simple fact is that, of the two mutually exclusive postulates - Madeleine dead vs. Madeleine abducted (alive), it is the former which is given more weight by the parents. Instead of dismissing the proposition as categorically impossible, they each, in their fashion, attempted to explain away the relevant indicators, whilst at the same time calling their own 'hypothesis' into question ("We strongly believe Madeleine was alive when she was taken."). Well, if you don't know...

'Madeleine' by Kate McCann. An account of the truth. From which something is missing.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 25
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by tigger on 12.02.13 17:01

6/6/2011
From Dr. Roberts' 'You were saying Kate?' which follows on from the post above. Also McCannfiles.com

From 'Madeleine' by Kate McCann (edited and abridged by Antonella Lazzeri and Oliver Harvey):

"At the time my brain simply couldn't connect such cases with Madeleine's. These were abuse victims, and as awful as such crimes were, Madeleine's was much worse. Our child had been stolen."

(What crime did Madeleine ever commit? There being 'no evidence that she has come to any harm,' how can 'stolen' be considered a worse fate than 'sexually abused?')

"I was totally perplexed. If, as the PJ alleged, Madeleine's blood was in the boot of our car, which we had not rented until May 27, how on earth had it got there? Did this mean someone had planted it? I could see no other explanation."

"At that point Gerry began to feel a lot better. He realised that no one could have planted forensic evidence to implicate us..."

(Gerry at least must have known the PJ did not have Madeleine's body - or blood samples
.)

"'They've got nothing!' he (Gerry) fired at Carlos. He began pointing out the many flaws in the PJ's 'evidence and the complete absence of logic."

"His emphasis suggested this was the gold standard. I just stared at him, unable to hide my contempt. These dogs had never been used in Portugal before..."

(And Benfica never win away from home).
unquote

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 25
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by DIBarlow on 12.02.13 18:01

Hi piglet1.

In answer to your thread title, yes, I do believe that, in the beginning, the McCanns thought that the world at large was stupid.

From all of their shenanigans it is clear that they had (and still have) delusions of grandeur, when in truth they have ably demonstrated to all and sundry the sad but true demise of professional standards in the UK.

As for the excerpts in tigger's post, do we think that it was Lazzeri or Harvey who decided that the reference by her own mother, to Maddie's perfect little genitals being torn apart, was too strong indeed for the delicate readers of the Stun, and merited censorship?

Or was in fact the 'censorship' yet another example of the UK media bending over backwards to cover up for this awful pair?

DIBarlow

Posts : 95
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-10-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by tigger on 12.02.13 18:12

@DIBarlow wrote:Hi piglet1.

In answer to your thread title, yes, I do believe that, in the beginning, the McCanns thought that the world at large was stupid.

From all of their shenanigans it is clear that they had (and still have) delusions of grandeur, when in truth they have ably demonstrated to all and sundry the sad but true demise of professional standards in the UK.

As for the excerpts in tigger's post, do we think that it was Lazzeri or Harvey who decided that the reference by her own mother, to Maddie's perfect little genitals being torn apart, was too strong indeed for the delicate readers of the Stun, and merited censorship?

Or was in fact the 'censorship' yet another example of the UK media bending over backwards to cover up for this awful pair?

I think that Dr. Roberts took his quotes from the serialisation of the book, possibly not wishing to buy it. Lazzeri is a mediocre journalist for one of the tabloids. In charge of gushing over the mcCanns.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 25
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by Inspectorfrost on 12.02.13 18:38

Quote

As Kate's narrative goes: "Supposing she had been killed - and we think this extremely unlikely - she must have been taken out of the apartment within minutes." Kate "struggled to understand how, never mind why, somebody could have killed Madeleine and removed her body within such a short time frame." "Did they (the PJ) really believe that a dog could smell the 'odour of death' three months later from a body that had been removed so swiftly?"

Unquote

Why within minutes? There is no proof she was removed within minutes of Gerry seeing her. Police weren't to be restricted by an uncorroborated, vague, non independent witness statement.

The PJ beliefs are irrelevant here. It was the British police who suggested taking these dogs in, and incidentally, months after, therefore the other assertion that the scent lasts no more than a month is false, unless the experts in the British police are incompetent, uneducated, and like to waste time and resources. I hardly think so.

The retelling of the dog story for the great unwashed doesn't hold at all, what with the dog sniffing and barking just to please it's master, being relieved that the dog did alert!, making out the scent is made up of only two chemicals, and so on. I would think she had insulted too many people with that little tale.


Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-12-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 12.02.13 18:58

@Inspectorfrost wrote:Quote

As Kate's narrative goes: "Supposing she had been killed - and we think this extremely unlikely - she must have been taken out of the apartment within minutes." Kate "struggled to understand how, never mind why, somebody could have killed Madeleine and removed her body within such a short time frame." "Did they (the PJ) really believe that a dog could smell the 'odour of death' three months later from a body that had been removed so swiftly?"

Unquote

Why within minutes? There is no proof she was removed within minutes of Gerry seeing her. Police weren't to be restricted by an uncorroborated, vague, non independent witness statement.

The PJ beliefs are irrelevant here. It was the British police who suggested taking these dogs in, and incidentally, months after, therefore the other assertion that the scent lasts no more than a month is false, unless the experts in the British police are incompetent, uneducated, and like to waste time and resources. I hardly think so.

The retelling of the dog story for the great unwashed doesn't hold at all, what with the dog sniffing and barking just to please it's master, being relieved that the dog did alert!, making out the scent is made up of only two chemicals, and so on. I would think she had insulted too many people with that little tale.


Within minutes is a falsehood - if Gerry had been there at 9-05 as claimed and Kate didn't raise the alarm til 10 that's the best part of an hour. So much for the half hourly checks.

____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by Hobs on 12.02.13 19:02

Cadeverine lingers for years even decades a there was a case recently where dogs reacted in the basement where a murder had allgedly taken place 66 years after the event.

Try again kate, 30 days and it poofs is garbage.


Hobs

Posts : 722
Reputation : 294
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 52
Location : uk

View user profile http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by Daisy on 12.02.13 19:17

Quick answer to the title of this thread is YES! They do think we're stupid. They have every right to come to that conclusion. WE let it happen.

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche

Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by plebgate on 12.02.13 20:08

I still believe that it did not enter any of their heads that their statements and part of the official files would ever end up on the internet where many people would be able to spend hour after hour going through everything and pointing out the discrepancies etc. As a result I rather think it is them who have been made to look stupid and not us.

plebgate

Posts : 5464
Reputation : 1179
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by Inspectorfrost on 12.02.13 20:14

@plebgate wrote:I still believe that it did not enter any of their heads that their statements and part of the official files would ever end up on the internet where many people would be able to spend hour after hour going through everything and pointing out the discrepancies etc. As a result I rather think it is them who have been made to look stupid and not us.
clapping

@Smokey, KM was trying to make out Madeleine was taken when Jane Tanner saw that man. Implanting the idea he definitely was the abductor. Something they have done for a very long time.

@Hobs

Try again kate, 30 days and it poofs is garbage.

Isn't it just.
lol!

The lengths they have gone to to discredit dogs since being made arguidos until today, says it all. I would like to know why they think that the dogs were not eager to please their master when taken everywhere else. That no comment was made about this ever suggests they were saying the police dog handler made the dogs alert. That could be construed as libel.


Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-12-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by Cristobell on 12.02.13 20:34

In answer to the title of this thread - yes, I do believe they think we are stupid. That is what I find so vexing about this case.

Although, in her defence, there are occasions where she is blissfully unaware that the story she gives is unbelievable. For example, the wonderful post we have just read from Dr. Roberts relates a segment of the book where Kate is describing the actions of Gerry. If she is referring to the night Madeleine vanished, as a mother, and on many levels a subjugated wife, why did she not leap on HIM, and tell him to go and find their baby! The idea of a grown man, a doctor and a father, sobbing on the floor is ridiculous in most of our eyes. The descriptions given of G and K's behaviour by the first police attending, are intriguing. The scenario of G and K kneeling on the bed and pounding their arms is freaky. I think we all have a built in defence mechanism when it comes to our children, that overrides hysteria and enables to do what we must do. Added to which these two were highly trained doctors, accustomed to dealing with emergencies. It doesn't ring true Kate. And that she thinks this is a believable reaction to the circumstances they found themselves in, is just scary.

I also find that video of Kate giving a description of her checking on the kids strange too. We are to believed that she walked all that way, missing the fun of the party, and she was content to turn around and go back to the bar, but didn't because the door was 10 centimetres ajar. What mother would not physically check on their babies while there? I mean look at them, pull their covers up. Make sure they had not got out of bed and wandered? And make sure they are breathing. Something many of us do, before turning in ourselves. I noticed Gerry's proud father moment did not include pulling her cover over her, he said she was lying on top of the bed. and other statements have said it was a chilly night. And if the abductor was in the apartment with him, as he has suggested, then the window would be open.

None of the story stands up to close scrutiny. Actually, little scrutiny is required, its pretty much in plain sight, thanks to the gargantuan media onslaught in the early hours of May 4th to establish the story. The messages from the start also handed out subliminal messages to shop thy neighbour if they expressed doubts. It has always been imperative for them to keep the facts of the case away from the general public, but it must now be proving impossible.




Cristobell

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by Dr What on 12.02.13 20:56

I agree with Daisy.
They do think that 'we' are stupid.
They [and their friends] have been able to change their statements repeatedly as the need has arisen, without formal challenge: they have been able to mobilise public support [in the short term, which enabled them to buy time]: they have been able to avoid answering awkward questions: they have gathered a huge amount of money to protect themselves from critical comment: they have been able to hide away,remain strong and develop their robotic responses to any questions:they have successfully relied on the various investigative authorities to show them huge amounts of sympathy.
Now that is making everyone look stupid.

Dr What

Posts : 241
Reputation : 17
Join date : 2012-10-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by Inspectorfrost on 12.02.13 21:30

@Dr What wrote:I agree with Daisy.
They do think that 'we' are stupid.
They [and their friends] have been able to change their statements repeatedly as the need has arisen, without formal challenge: they have been able to mobilise public support [in the short term, which enabled them to buy time]: they have been able to avoid answering awkward questions: they have gathered a huge amount of money to protect themselves from critical comment: they have been able to hide away,remain strong and develop their robotic responses to any questions:they have successfully relied on the various investigative authorities to show them huge amounts of sympathy.
Now that is making everyone look stupid.
clapping
BUT when the truth comes out, it would make some people look stupid, the overly sycophantic fawning ones, but not all.If the Mccanns think they can take on and slag off the government and the media and police forces (not forgetting the scores of others they have as well who tried to help or asked questions) they really do need a reality check at the least. But alas I don't think they do reality.

To Mr Mccan, please do google the dictionary for HUBRIS

Here you go

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubris
thumbsup




Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-12-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by Guest on 12.02.13 21:51

@plebgate wrote:I still believe that it did not enter any of their heads that their statements and part of the official files would ever end up on the internet where many people would be able to spend hour after hour going through everything and pointing out the discrepancies etc. As a result I rather think it is them who have been made to look stupid and not us.

agree

I think it's got to be hard to realize that everyone can't be controlled and conditioned. And to realize that your mistakes have been recorded.

Media is a powerful tool, I've seen it often. People meet and discuss footie with their own individual thoughts and before you know it they're conforming to the acceptable output from whatever media stream is applicable on a given day. As Kate said, they were working very hard, really. Using peoples donations to control the people. I don't really think they care what an individual thinks so long as they chant the acceptable mantra. And pay up. In a sense it's very shallow.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Do they think we are stupid??!

Post by Mirage on 12.02.13 22:31

Do they think we're stupid?
I don't believe they think at all, they just react. This is symptomatic of their deep narcissism.
They lack awareness and empathy.
They are also reckless risk takers and like to take things to the wire . It's a way of feeling alive when they are already dead inside.
They cannot accept that they are not acceptable, that their careful construct is disbelieved. After all, they made this little construct their world for so long, it is a reality to them.
They cry out more and more for the oxygen of belief and it is denied them. More and more they are being forced to breathe the fetid air of their lies .

Mirage

Posts : 1667
Reputation : 382
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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