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

Who Could Break First (and why?)

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

WHO DO YOU THINK MIGHT BREAK FIRST???

12% 12% 
[ 6 ]
2% 2% 
[ 1 ]
27% 27% 
[ 14 ]
21% 21% 
[ 11 ]
0% 0% 
[ 0 ]
0% 0% 
[ 0 ]
2% 2% 
[ 1 ]
6% 6% 
[ 3 ]
8% 8% 
[ 4 ]
22% 22% 
[ 12 ]
 
Total Votes : 52

Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by rainbow-fairy on 16.02.13 23:16

Following on from something Goncalo Amaral once said about the events of May 07 being too serious a burden to carry for ever, I thought it might be interesting to see what the general consensus is and who is considered most likely to break, either through further questioning OR conscience (I know, I know! laughat )

Would be interested to hear reasons for choice also yes

____________________
"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

Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by sammyc on 17.02.13 7:57

I'ts a toss up between Kate and Jane I reckon. Kate could crack first because of the burden of guilt and having to keep up an appearance of a happy, solid united marriage with Gerry. For all we know they could be at each other's throats, so to speak, behind closed doors. As someone posted recently, if the net is closing in on the Mccanns then the twins are at risk. I totally agree. We have seen too many times now how innocent children are harmed when adults can't accept their fate.

On the other hand if it was due to be questioned by tough, gritty , seasoned, determined Detectives then get Jane Tanner in first and watch her fall apart in minutes. It's just a pity her interview couldn't be screened live.

sammyc

Posts : 222
Reputation : 55
Join date : 2011-10-06
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Guest on 17.02.13 8:33

I think the McCanns have both passed their critical point and are well past the point of no return. If Kate was going to crack it would have been the first few times Gerry was away after the news broke. And from what Kate says in her book Gerry was close at his arguido interview.

My money is on Russell. From the interview it seems he doesn't like lying and isn't able for pressure.

It's a very good question. I'm sure now that their children are getting older the enormity of the situation has hit them all.

I often wonder how close they are now and what they really think of each other. And if they were transported back to that moment where the decision was made if they'd do anything different.


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Buildersbum on 17.02.13 8:53

I think it will be others, imo if SY do haul them in for questioning...they will be a lot of people who will panick and be prepared to spill the beans ,McCanns and Tap pals inc family would have spoke out befor now, there stuck like glue imo

Buildersbum

Posts : 47
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-10-11
Location : Yorkshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by PeterMac on 17.02.13 8:56

Kate may want to hang on to the remaining children. To do that she has to present as reliable full of regret, and capable of rehabilitation. That might just work.
But if I were a detective I would start with other family members, Philomena in particular.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by plebgate on 17.02.13 9:05

Finn posted:
"I think the McCanns have both passed their critical point and are well
past the point of no return. If Kate was going to crack it would have
been the first few times Gerry was away after the news broke"

I agree with that.
I believe the only way any of ever finding out what went on during that holiday is under cross exam in a court of law. None of the other tapas group will speak publicly about events - why would they. I doubt most of the general public would recognise their names now let alone remember that they too left their children alone at nights during the holiday and they want to keep it that way. Who wouldn't?

plebgate

Posts : 5464
Reputation : 1178
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Mirage on 17.02.13 9:23

Kate memorably said: If I could wind back time, I would take a good look round to see who was watching us that week.

Good idea. Hypnosis is the answer. Then she can tell us exactly where she and Gerry were and what they were doing all that week.

Mirage

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by plebgate on 17.02.13 9:32

Great idea Mirage but as they refused to do a lie detector I don't think they would never willingly agree to hypnosis.

plebgate

Posts : 5464
Reputation : 1178
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Olive_Boyle on 17.02.13 9:39

@PeterMac wrote:
But if I were a detective I would start with other family members, Philomena in particular.

PeterMac you did used to be a detective I believe.

Do you know if the British Police are able to call any of them in for a chat/interview, as part of the review or otherwise?

I think too that this is the only way the case will be resolved.

I have often wondered why on earth the Police haven't done this before, because with a bit of pressure and a promise that they will not be charged if they co-operate, I truly believe that certain individuals will crumble.

Olive_Boyle

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Spaniel on 17.02.13 10:11

I voted "other" Other being Charlotte Pennington, as I'd need to establish whether the children were left alone. If they weren't, there could be no abduction.

I find it too difficult to believe that nine out of nine adults chose to leave their children alone. There's always one dissenter in a group over a decision like that, usually a mother, whose husband gives in to keep the peace.
When this story first broke, I wasn't paying much attention and assumed the couple had been sitting out on the balcony, which is the furthest we ever were from our child on holiday.

Scroll down in the link to "Where was Charlotte Pennington."
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id70.html

Spaniel

Posts : 743
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-01-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Truthmustout on 17.02.13 11:08

I voted Jane tanner. She has the main burden and pressure as her lie is what keep k and g scream that it was an abduction. Her lie is their main evidence and proof.

And in their documentary when doing the reconstruction she falls apart and cries, and Gerry bully her saying she is wrong In where he and Jw where standing.

She would crack like a nut hit by a hammer in no time under the right surcomstenses...IMO of course .

____________________
The tide is turning - justice is coming ! Freedom of speech for all !

Truthmustout

Posts : 128
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-02-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Mirage on 17.02.13 11:32

Moa-Vanilla wrote:I voted Jane tanner. She has the main burden and pressure as her lie is what keep k and g scream that it was an abduction. Her lie is their main evidence and proof.

And in their documentary when doing the reconstruction she falls apart and cries, and Gerry bully her saying she is wrong In where he and Jw where standing.

She would crack like a nut hit by a hammer in no time under the right surcomstenses...IMO of course .

I tend to agree Moa-Vanilla. Rigorous police questioning in a formal interview would probably do it. Jane Tanner knows that the Mcs lay blame anywhere but on their own shoulders. She must watch with alarm as they look more and more compromised and isolated. She has experienced Gerald's Machiavellian ways and knows what he is capable of doing to save his own skin.

And where Gerry goes, Kate follows. How many times does she say, "As Gerry says...." (She said it again on the Marr Show today). She is hellbent on not taking the rap for anything as well - certainly not without dragging a few down with her, because she possesses a vindictive streak.

I think they are actually putting themselves in quite a bit of danger by refusing to shut up trying to justify the unjustifiable.

The toll on them is now evident. GM in the way he is boiling with rage - KM in her emotionally weakened state.

There is always a possibility KM will make one more pivotal phone call when the pressure becomes unbearable.

Whatever happens, my concern lies with the twins.

Mirage

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by saltnpepper on 17.02.13 11:43

Would be nice to see them questioned in the proper enviroment with questioning the case deserves
Matthew Oldfield would be my choice as he was the last to be known in the apartment before the alarm was raised,i think under the right questioning technique he could be put under a lot of pressure
I dont think any of them would confess through conscience

saltnpepper

Posts : 154
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-04-30
Location : wales

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by sharonl on 17.02.13 11:45

If we stood back from the burning question "What happened to Madeleine McCann?" and starting asking "why are the British Government so committed to assisting the parents of one missing child when there are thousands more?", as we get closer to the answer to that particular question, we may just see a change in the attitude of the Government and the press. Then I would suggest that it would be the Government, or some of the top supporters up North that would cave in.

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

sharonl


Posts : 3604
Reputation : 435
Join date : 2009-12-29

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

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Mirage on 17.02.13 11:59

@sharonl wrote:If we stood back from the burning question "What happened to Madeleine McCann?" and starting asking "why are the British Government so committed to assisting the parents of one missing child when there are thousands more?", as we get closer to the answer to that particular question, we may just see a change in the attitude of the Government and the press. Then I would suggest that it would be the Government, or some of the top supporters up North that would cave in.

Interesting point, sharonl.

If we feel worn down with them, imagine how their minders feel?

Mirage

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by rainbow-fairy on 17.02.13 15:02

@sharonl wrote:If we stood back from the burning question "What happened to Madeleine McCann?" and starting asking "why are the British Government so committed to assisting the parents of one missing child when there are thousands more?", as we get closer to the answer to that particular question, we may just see a change in the attitude of the Government and the press. Then I would suggest that it would be the Government, or some of the top supporters up North that would cave in.
An excellent point sharonl and pretty much my thinking when I wrote 'others' though I was half asleep and didn't include it!
I'm constantly amazed and saddened by the apathy and gullibility of the UK public on the whole Sad

____________________
"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: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Angelique on 17.02.13 15:28

I think sharonl is correct:

"why are the British Government so committed to assisting the parents of one missing child when there are thousands more?"

I can't vote even though I have suggested it would be JT that would crack in the past.

I think the nearer we get to answer the "why" the more chance of it being further obscured. I think Kate and Gerry and the rest of the Tapas have accepted they will take the "why" to their death beds. The rest, OC and the like played such a small part they don't have any pressure to crack. Unless we can expose it before they will never confess.

____________________
Things aren't always what they seem

Angelique

Posts : 1396
Reputation : 35
Join date : 2010-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by roy rovers on 17.02.13 16:07

It would make a good episode of 'Cracker' with Robbie Coltrane. Perhaps a Christmas special.

It beats me why these interviews have not taken place since they wouldn't cost much compared to the millions of taxpayer's money spent on the review.

roy rovers

Posts : 466
Reputation : 39
Join date : 2012-03-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by PeterMac on 17.02.13 16:34

Moa-Vanilla wrote:I voted Jane tanner. She has the main burden and pressure as her lie is what keep k and g scream that it was an abduction. Her lie is their main evidence and proof.
And in their documentary when doing the reconstruction she falls apart and cries, and Gerry bully her saying she is wrong In where he and Jw where standing..
She is also the one who insisted several times that she was telling the truth.

10th May statement, "She swore "by everything most sacred" that what she said is true, namely that she saw an individual with a child in his arms."

Rogatory - " I think you saw my reaction earlier that you know, I’m telling the truth, you know there’s Kate and Gerry are telling the truth, there’s no way they are involved in any shape or form,"

“Well, I mean, just whatever, they were, they were standing there. And, you know, just from, how I wouldn’t know they were standing there. And if I was trying to make this up, don’t you think I would have made damn sure they saw me. Why on earth would I say I saw them and then they turn round and say they didn’t see me. It’s just, you know, it’s just, you know, I think that’s just, yeah, it’s just. I’m not making this up”.

“But, you know, I think it’s, I do, I’m not the sort of person that would make this up, I don’t want any limelight, you know, you’ve only got to look, ask people that know me, I’m not”.

Which is code which any detective would understand for
It wasn't
I'm not
They are not
I am
I am


I especially love
" It’s just, you know, it’s just, you know, I think that’s just, yeah, it’s just. - - - - - - I’m not making this up”.
Twisting and turning like a twisty turny thing as Blackadder would have said
She is not making it up , because she is not actually saying anything. She cannot bring herself to repeat it, and cannot bring herself to admit it was not true.
She is gibbering, and possibly on the point of tears and a nervous collaspe which a well placed question might have elicited.
I used to love interviewing suspects !

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by russiandoll on 17.02.13 16:59

I went for ROB over JT because I would like to have him pressed on this from his RI :

Kate and Gerry did their checks by the clock.

Between courses would be more convenient for the adults, for sure, or maybe if things were slow, interrupting their eating.
The above though implies that child safety was more important than parental convenience.
By the clock............as in routine regular observations of vitals?

You see Kate knew Maddie could not have woken and wandered.
That certainty means sedation to me.
And they would certainly need regular observations.

Hence the clock-watching.

I would also like to see him pressed on his reasons for absenting himself from the table around the crucial time that evening.

____________________



             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: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Mirage on 17.02.13 17:02

[quote="Spaniel"]I voted "other" Other being Charlotte Pennington, as I'd need to establish whether the children were left alone. If they weren't, there could be no abduction.

I find it too difficult to believe that nine out of nine adults chose to leave their children alone. There's always one dissenter in a group over a decision like that, usually a mother, whose husband gives in to keep the peace.
When this story first broke, I wasn't paying much attention and assumed the couple had been sitting out on the balcony, which is the furthest we ever were from our child on holiday.

Scroll down in the link to "Where was Charlotte Pennington."
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id70.html[/quote]

Hi Spanner. I voted Jane Tanner. I still think she (along with ROB) is the one with most on her conscience apart from the McCanns. However, I have been intrigued by the inconsistencies in Charlotte Pennington's statements too - and the fact she took off to NZ soon after her visit to Rothley in 2007. So, I agree, she is certainly a possibility.

I don't know enough about her to say whether she would withstand a real grilling. Depends what came her way in the aftermath in the way of quid pro quo. She certainly paid Rothley a visit post Sept 2007. Then it was off to NZ and a new career acting in a tv soap, fulfilling a longed-for career as an actress and leaving her nannying days far behind!

The stakes are high for anyone who has been less than honest. In case they are under any illusion, it's called perverting the course of justice. Anyone falling into that category needs a clear-headed strategy at this point to ameliorate their situation. The end game for them could be very serious indeed if they continue to sit on their hands in what I sense is a changing climate around the McCanns.

I can even imagine a scenario where JT is deemed to have "misled" everyone with her abductor story and the spotlight turned full beam on her. I believe that is why GM was ambivalent about her testimony - he left an exit rout IMO, realising that she is not all that bright. Unfortunately for her, that could prove to be dire given that she is inarticulate and unable to express/defend herself properly in interviews. It will be even worse come the time she has to unpick it all and argue duress.

I wonder if Gerry has ever heard of saturation point? If I were in their boots I wouldn't keep drawing attention to myself, especially in front of an increasingly hostile public, judging by online comments.

But then, bombast is his stock in trade. I predict it will be his downfall in the end.

Mirage

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by PeterMac on 17.02.13 17:43

@Mirage wrote:
The stakes are high for anyone who has been less than honest. In case they are under any illusion, it's called perverting the course of justice. Anyone falling into that category needs a clear-headed strategy at this point to ameliorate their situation. The end game for them could be very serious indeed if they continue to sit on their hands in what I sense is a changing climate around the McCanns.
I can even imagine a scenario where JT is deemed to have "misled" everyone with her abductor story and the spotlight turned full beam on her. I believe that is why GM was ambivalent about her testimony - he left an exit rout IMO, realising that she is not all that bright. Unfortunately for her, that could prove to be dire given that she is inarticulate and unable to express/defend herself properly in interviews. It will be even worse come the time she has to unpick it all and argue duress.
Good points and well made.
It might even amount to Conspiracy to pervert, which carries the same Life Imprisonment as a Common Law offence, but attracts slightly greater sentences.
Normal guidelines are 4 - 18 months, with the sentence not normally suspended, but Archer got 4 years, (and 2 and 3 and another 4) for his offences.

The stakes are very high, and the first one or two to jump will be very lucky.
The rest . . .
Timing is everything.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Spaniel on 17.02.13 17:48

I didn't realise she was in NZ mirage, nor that it was the Hollywood of the Antipodes. NSY budget won't stretch to that visit so Ill have to forget her.
I was interested as she claimed to be first on the scene, so should be a vital witness.

I'd be the only vote for Gerry then, only because he was so visibly shaken after leaving the police station. Something I found with those with NPD is they go to pieces when the chips are down and look to others to get them out of it. It was obvious that night she was the strong one, and I doubt any of this was her initial doing. He wouldn't take the rap for her, no way IMHO.

Spaniel

Posts : 743
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-01-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Trainer on 17.02.13 18:07

The main players are in deep but some one on the edge may be feeling a little left out.

just a little pressure from the yard would be needed. a small player could spill the beans sell their story make a few 100k, an attractive option for some one on the edge of the story.

I'm sure a few have been paid a couple of grand to keep to the story along with a few threat,s from everyone's favourite law firm.

So my vote goes to ? No idea could be anyone

Trainer

Posts : 46
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-01-26
Location : Uk

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Who Could Break First (and why?)

Post by Woofer on 17.02.13 18:16

Does anyone know if a `Review` consists of merely looking through the files or would it include re-interviewing the T9?

I can`t see the point of going through all that Portuguese paperwork unless SY interview the T9. Or are SY only reviewing the case on the assumption that the T9 are totally innocent (which seems preposterous to me).

Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 3 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