The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

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.

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

Regards,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 05.05.13 17:52

@PeterMac wrote:It is, in short, Ludicrous.
At every level.
What is of concern is the number of people have never bothered to turn their minds to this.
Carter-Ruck have, probably sensibly and deliberately, excluded themselves from any consideration of the facts. That is not their concern. Money is.
Perhaps, though, the superior and incisive mind of Adrienne, QC, turned the tide, and led to the sudden costs climb down we saw the other day.
Perhaps she took C-R by the shoulders and gave them a good shake.
Perhaps she told them she could never accept a brief, realising what she then must have done.
I dont know, but the final agreed costs were not even sufficient to cover her bill.

It will be interesting to see the next set of fund accounts to see if the Fund paid the bills. If not, then who? I can't see it being pro-bono, not at this stage and for that sum, and surely a wealthy backer would draw the line by now. Very curious.


____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Nina on 05.05.13 18:04

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:It is, in short, Ludicrous.
At every level.
What is of concern is the number of people have never bothered to turn their minds to this.
Carter-Ruck have, probably sensibly and deliberately, excluded themselves from any consideration of the facts. That is not their concern. Money is.
Perhaps, though, the superior and incisive mind of Adrienne, QC, turned the tide, and led to the sudden costs climb down we saw the other day.
Perhaps she took C-R by the shoulders and gave them a good shake.
Perhaps she told them she could never accept a brief, realising what she then must have done.
I dont know, but the final agreed costs were not even sufficient to cover her bill.

It will be interesting to see the next set of fund accounts to see if the Fund paid the bills. If not, then who? I can't see it being pro-bono, not at this stage and for that sum, and surely a wealthy backer would draw the line by now. Very curious.




Well, as has been said before, we shall have to follow the money yes

____________________
Not one more cent from me.

Nina

Posts : 2696
Reputation : 240
Join date : 2011-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Guest on 05.05.13 19:01

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:Thanks Peter.

So Gerry's statement that the door was closed but not locked is slightly misleading, as anyone approaching the door who did not have a key could not have got in, and would find it "locked" to all meaningful intents and purposes, even if it wasn't double locked.

A potential abductor had NO involvement with the window as forensic examinations have proven (lichen undisturbed on frame and given the height of the window from the ground outside, passing through the window either in or out, has been factually ruled out by scientific evidence.

And according to the Tapas story, they could see the patio balcony from the restaurant (and this forms part of their justification for leaving the children in the apartment), much reducing if not completely eliminating this as a potential entry point, and the front door inaccessible UNLESS one had a key.

So how is the abductor supposed to have first, secreted himself into the apartment unseen and then out again, hindered by carrying a child, and at a time when there were various Tapas members and Jeremy Wilkins in the near vicinity, and how did he suddenly emerge at a position to be seen by Jane Tanner where the only possible entry/exit route was the window, which scientific fact has eliminated from the investigation?

Even if there had been TWO people involved, and one had carefully handed a sleeping Madeleine to an accomplice through an open window, this does not explain how he got out of the apartment unseen when the father was standing outside.

This issue has been discussed ad nauseum, and over the years these facts have been chewed over relentlessly, but from an investigative point of view given the information in the public domain, this high risk strategy affording at most a couple of minutes possible opportunity, seems a risk too far for even the most rabid and determined child snatcher, and renders the whole proposition implausible.

And if the perpetrator had been watching the McCann's apartment as they claim, on the night that Mrs Fenn heard the crying for an hour and a half, or any other night when the checks were less frequent he would have had a far greater opportunity.

Indeed, if it was a carefully planned grab as has been suggested, the abductor picked the moment in time which was the busiest the checking system had ever been at any time in the entire holiday. There was barely a moment when someones Tapas wasn't getting cold that night with all the manic activity, so the notion that on that night of all nights, the abductor would take a deep breath, set 2 minutes on his stopwatch, and set about committing a successful abduction takes the odds of probability into the order of billions to one.

Not to forget: there is a local kindergarten close by, where Portuguese kids were available for abduction every day (sorry; I mean it, but I don't want to seem callous, just pointing out the small odds of someone selecting an english child, and of all the english children available on May 3rd -even the Tapas ones, behind their babyphone e.g. just this one little girl which was 'demonstrably' checked every few minutes.

It beggars belief.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 05.05.13 19:34

It does indeed beggar belief! When one considers that the night in question was the busiest by far in terms of checking, the two minute window of opportunity available according to their own statements and times, ( and I don't believe for one moment that the abductor was hiding in the apartment - the only place an abductor could hide is in a cupboard or under a bed, and I don't believe that could be achieved silently in about 2 seconds of hearing Gerry slide open the patio door), it is too risky by far to be attempted.

And an abductor would HAVE to have been watching the apartment or else they wouldn't know that there was not someone sitting in the lounge. So would someone really risk a lengthy jail term to commit a crime where there is such a risk of being caught? The only way is if there were not the checks occurring as has been claimed.

Scotland Yard, if you are reading this, please get on over to PdL and try and recreate the circumstances yourselves, according to the Tapas witness statements from the night in question, and then make an announcement to the public whether or not it was possible. Take a few mates with you to enact the Tapas movements because it's no good reading thousands of bits of paper if the abduction itself could not have taken place according to the truthful statements of the main players.

____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Guest on 05.05.13 20:11

It's probably been mentioned somewhere but something I didn't notice before about GM's statement of 04/05/07. They seemed to make a lot of noise about things being lost in translation but it seems very clear to me. GM used his key and entered through the front door. MO had no key and entered through the patio door. KM used her key and entered through the front door. This detail must have been translated carefully to him before he signed the statement. I suppose I never noticed before that they clearly distinguished Matt had used the patio door. And it implies that as they only had one set of keys he would have given them to KM before her check.

Later that same day KM is so nervous she needs GM with her for her interview and says she used the sliding door.

Does anyone know for sure if the children's bedroom shutters would have been visible for JT, MO and ROB from the front entrance?


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Nina on 05.05.13 20:12

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:It does indeed beggar belief! When one considers that the night in question was the busiest by far in terms of checking, the two minute window of opportunity available according to their own statements and times, ( and I don't believe for one moment that the abductor was hiding in the apartment - the only place an abductor could hide is in a cupboard or under a bed, and I don't believe that could be achieved silently in about 2 seconds of hearing Gerry slide open the patio door), it is too risky by far to be attempted.

And an abductor would HAVE to have been watching the apartment or else they wouldn't know that there was not someone sitting in the lounge. So would someone really risk a lengthy jail term to commit a crime where there is such a risk of being caught? The only way is if there were not the checks occurring as has been claimed.

Scotland Yard, if you are reading this, please get on over to PdL and try and recreate the circumstances yourselves, according to the Tapas witness statements from the night in question, and then make an announcement to the public whether or not it was possible. Take a few mates with you to enact the Tapas movements because it's no good reading thousands of bits of paper if the abduction itself could not have taken place according to the truthful statements of the main players.

No hiding under beds, they were divans, so that just leaves wardrobes. The ones in the children's room had a cot right up to the door and the ones in the parent's room had shelves, so even those are not hidyholes. Must have been wearing his invisibility cloak of Harry Potter fame.

____________________
Not one more cent from me.

Nina

Posts : 2696
Reputation : 240
Join date : 2011-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by tigger on 05.05.13 21:09

Finn wrote:It's probably been mentioned somewhere but something I didn't notice before about GM's statement of 04/05/07. They seemed to make a lot of noise about things being lost in translation but it seems very clear to me. GM used his key and entered through the front door. MO had no key and entered through the patio door. KM used her key and entered through the front door. This detail must have been translated carefully to him before he signed the statement. I suppose I never noticed before that they clearly distinguished Matt had used the patio door. And it implies that as they only had one set of keys he would have given them to KM before her check.

Later that same day KM is so nervous she needs GM with her for her interview and says she used the sliding door.

Does anyone know for sure if the children's bedroom shutters would have been visible for JT, MO and ROB from the front entrance?


I don't have it to hand, but Rachel Mampilly says in her PJ statement that ALL the shutters were down and specifically states that the patio door shutters were down as well. This is of course in accordance with the written timeline which says: ALL shutters down.
Imagine the racket that would make with every check and one would think that MO had to raise them to go in. The argument at one time for using the patio door was that it wouldn't make so much noise as the front door? I seem to recall?

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Nina on 05.05.13 21:23

@tigger wrote:
Finn wrote:It's probably been mentioned somewhere but something I didn't notice before about GM's statement of 04/05/07. They seemed to make a lot of noise about things being lost in translation but it seems very clear to me. GM used his key and entered through the front door. MO had no key and entered through the patio door. KM used her key and entered through the front door. This detail must have been translated carefully to him before he signed the statement. I suppose I never noticed before that they clearly distinguished Matt had used the patio door. And it implies that as they only had one set of keys he would have given them to KM before her check.

Later that same day KM is so nervous she needs GM with her for her interview and says she used the sliding door.

Does anyone know for sure if the children's bedroom shutters would have been visible for JT, MO and ROB from the front entrance?


I don't have it to hand, but Rachel Mampilly says in her PJ statement that ALL the shutters were down and specifically states that the patio door shutters were down as well. This is of course in accordance with the written timeline which says: ALL shutters down.
Imagine the racket that would make with every check and one would think that MO had to raise them to go in. The argument at one time for using the patio door was that it wouldn't make so much noise as the front door? I seem to recall?

And if the shutters were down on the patio doors they wouldn't be able to get in from the outside as they are raised from the inside like the window shutters are in the children's bedroom. The other windows in the apartment, the kitchen and the lounge didn't have shutters as they were not at street level. being on a slope they were too high for intruders so not required.

____________________
Not one more cent from me.

Nina

Posts : 2696
Reputation : 240
Join date : 2011-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Guest on 05.05.13 21:30

Finn wrote:[...]

Does anyone know for sure if the children's bedroom shutters would have been visible for JT, MO and ROB from the front entrance?


***
The children's bedroom window/shutters was IIRC directly next to the front door.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Nina on 05.05.13 21:36

Châtelaine wrote:
Finn wrote:[...]

Does anyone know for sure if the children's bedroom shutters would have been visible for JT, MO and ROB from the front entrance?


***
The children's bedroom window/shutters was IIRC directly next to the front door.

Yes, though the door was set slightly further back, not on a level with the window wall.

____________________
Not one more cent from me.

Nina

Posts : 2696
Reputation : 240
Join date : 2011-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Guest on 05.05.13 22:00

Quite right, Nina. But to get to the front door you'd have to go passed the children's bedroom window.
Anyway, since they've all since kind of agreed [with time] that they were entering and leaving by the sliding patio doors, I do not see the present point of discussion.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Nina on 05.05.13 22:08

Châtelaine wrote:Quite right, Nina. But to get to the front door you'd have to go passed the children's bedroom window.
Anyway, since they've all since kind of agreed [with time] that they were entering and leaving by the sliding patio doors, I do not see the present point of discussion.

laughat Yes I'm a tad confused too.

____________________
Not one more cent from me.

Nina

Posts : 2696
Reputation : 240
Join date : 2011-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Guest on 05.05.13 23:19

I'm sorry for the confusion, let me clarify.

Because the "abudction" had to happen within seconds of GM having done his check the implication is that the abductor had already gained access to the apartment having jemmied the shutters and hidden (not sure where exactly as Nina has pointed out)

When we look at the amended witness statements we see that GM, KM or MO didn't enter 5A by the front door (the back of the apartments facing the road) therefore wouldn't have noticed the jemmied shutters.

But we know from the statements that ROB, MO and JT still claim to have accessed the rear of the apartments or gone for their checks, if so wouldn't they have noticed the jemmied shutters in 5A? Some were asked in their '08 rogs but claimed they wouldn't have seen the 5A shutters. I'm just wondering if they are in fact visible or not.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Guest on 05.05.13 23:51

IIRC the FRONT entrance to their apartments would have been straight right from the front entrance of apt. 5A. So IF they would have made their checks via their front entrances, they would NOT have passed by 5A ... but very close to the window of the children's room. It IS possible they wouldn't have noticed "jemmied" shutters ... But then, we all know they weren't.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by suzyjohnson on 06.05.13 0:59

Finn, JT, MO and ROB would have had to walk right past not only jemmied shutters but a wide open window. Not only that GM was actually in the children's room at 9.05-910 pm and didn't notice the open window and shutters (which they must have been if JT's abductor had broken in through them) and then MO was standing by the door of the children's room and didn't see them either (which they must have been if JT's abductor went out by the window.

Only observant KM noticed all of this at 10pm (Now I am thinking did KM specifically state that the curtains were still closed despite the open window and shutters, so that it would be less likely that MO would notice the open window?)

PeterMac - '.......You see it here, Reception, footpath, gate.
You could only get into the garden by climbing over the wall. Immediately below the red circle is the wall of the pool complex with brown tiles on top, then the footpath, and then the wall to the garden of 5A ........' I see now, thanks

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1045
Reputation : 169
Join date : 2013-03-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by tigger on 06.05.13 6:29

Finn wrote:I'm sorry for the confusion, let me clarify.

Because the "abudction" had to happen within seconds of GM having done his check the implication is that the abductor had already gained access to the apartment having jemmied the shutters and hidden (not sure where exactly as Nina has pointed out)

When we look at the amended witness statements we see that GM, KM or MO didn't enter 5A by the front door (the back of the apartments facing the road) therefore wouldn't have noticed the jemmied shutters.

But we know from the statements that ROB, MO and JT still claim to have accessed the rear of the apartments or gone for their checks, if so wouldn't they have noticed the jemmied shutters in 5A? Some were asked in their '08 rogs but claimed they wouldn't have seen the 5A shutters. I'm just wondering if they are in fact visible or not.

Amaral says something in his book that they weren't very observant. This was early on in the proceedings. It does please me rather that the tabloid credo 'All foreigners are stupid' is what scuppered the enterprise. The intelligence and rational thinking of a sardine munching police force was never taken into account.
'Trust me, I'm a British doctor - this is what happened.' - Didn't really work.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Guest on 06.05.13 8:16

Châtelaine, my mistake. For some reason I keep mistaking the front of the apartments for the back because they're further from the OC. From the rogs MO, JT and ROB claim to have locked their patio doors and entered/listened from the front. So in my mind the window should have been in their line of vision.

Suzyjohnson, I think observant KM was saying the curtains were closed but flapping, that's how she knew the window was open.

Tigger, it must have been a very puzzling situation for the PJ's. On the one hand there's a missing child and the world's media watching every move and on the other a very strange story that makes no sense.

In MO's first interview he's clear that the McCann children's shutter was definitely closed at 9.05. If he noticed that then why didn't he notice during his 9.25 check that they were open particularly when he was passing by the window on his way into the apartment to check the McCann children.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

-we had to go to the Toddler club ourselves....

Post by tigger on 06.05.13 19:45


EXCLUSIVE to mccannfiles.com

By Dr Martin Roberts
20 January 2012


A TENSE SITUATION

Time is of the essence. It is so important to each of us in our daily lives that, in the course of mankind's cultural history, every effort has been made to quantify it - pictorially, mechanically, electronically; even relatively.

What did the McCanns do with their precious time in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance, first announced on Thursday night, 3 May 2007? Kate McCann has told us (parentheses mine).

Friday 4: Virtually the entire day was spent at PJ headquarters in Portimao. They travelled there with police at 10.00 a.m. (p.88) returning to Praia da Luz 'some time after 8.30 p.m.' (p.92).

Saturday 5: 'Alan Pike (trauma psychologist)... was at the door of our apartment by 6.00 a.m... we talked... for several hours... it turned out to be a bewilderingly busy day for Gerry and me...' (p.99-101). 'Three family liaison officers (FLOs) from Leicestershire force... came to introduce themselves.' (p.102). 'We had so many meetings that day...' (p.103). 'Neither Gerry nor I was functioning remotely properly... At lunchtime, over by the Tapas area, Gerry saw a crowd of departing guests... With a new batch of incoming holidaymakers, more of our relatives appeared.' (p.104)
[..]
Monday 7: British expatriates living permanently in Praia da Luz organized a search of the area. The volunteers were joined by most of our family and friends... while Gerry and I were tied up with Andy Bowes and Alex Woolfall... When lunchtime came, Gerry and I were in the middle of another meeting.. we had to go to the Toddler Club ourselves... Once we were left with our leaner support group, we allocated general roles... It had been suggested that I should record a televised appeal aimed at Madeleine's abductor, and this is what we had been discussing that morning with Andy and Alex... (p.111) Andy Bowes had proposed delivering part of my appeal in Portuguese, which I did. Gerry sat beside me...' (p.112). 'I was hugely relieved when it was over... Around teatime, Father Ze turned up...' (p.113). 'We were seeing the Leicestershire FLOs every day. That Monday evening... we lost it with the liaison officers.' (p.113-4).
unquote

Worth reading the whole of this. Pertaining to the first few days after your daughter is abducted I am particularly struck by this throwaway line :we had to go to the Toddler Club ourselves...

I'm inviting anyone who feels like it to place themselves in that situation. The sentence indicates that they did not take the twins to and from the creche themselves, not even after losing one child. We get the impression that picking their remaining children up from the creche was seen as a chore.
As early as the 7th of May.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Guest on 06.05.13 20:24

"Words can not describe", what I think about that ...


ETA : I have the book but never had the courage to read it all. My fault ...

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by tigger on 07.05.13 20:22

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:How she would know what was going on through the night whilst tucked up in the apartment and not out searching herself is anyones guess. 60 people including several police officers and sniffer dogs were out all night. If she had to wait til it was light, why shouldn't everyone else have made that choice? And if the parent doesn't go out searching, why the heck should anyone else? It is this attitude of Kate's and the way she expresses it which makes me feel very cross. Her comments may have some validity if it were demonstrated that she ever did more than have a cursory glance around for about an hour. How dare she slag off anyone who was out all night looking for her child, including the police who were off-duty.


An extract from the 27/5/07 BBC interview:

JH: And I've spoken to a lot of people, over the weeks, who... local people who'd given up a lot of time. You've talked about the support that they've given you. I met people who didn't go to work for more than a week because everyday they were down on the beach, searching the streets. Did you, as a mother Kate, just sometimes think 'I've got to go and be out there with them. I want to go and just physically look as well'?


KM: I mean, I did... we'd been working really hard really. Apart... I mean, the first 48 hours, as Gerry said, are incredibly difficult and we were almost non-functioning, I'd say, but after that you get strength from somewhere. We've certainly had loads of support and that's given us strength and its been able to make us focus really so we have actually, in our own way, it might not be physically searching but we've been working really hard and doing absolutely everything we can, really, to get Madeleine back.

From the book 'Madeleine':
chapter 6:
..As soon as it was light Gerry and I resumed our search. We went up and down roads we’d never seen before, having barely left the Ocean Club complex all week. We jumped over walls and raked through undergrowth. We looked in ditches and holes....



It's quite clear that she freely admits they didn't search - four years later in the book, they resume a search which never happened. Absolutely. Not.
From the horse's mouth.

_____
_______________

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Guest on 07.05.13 20:31

Châtelaine wrote:"Words can not describe", what I think about that ...


ETA : I have the book but never had the courage to read it all. My fault ...

Same here.

I had to write a Court brief, which took all of a fortnight.

If I ran out of steam there, I perused the book.

This, so disgusted me, I happily returned to the job on hand.

25 pages (of my brief) later, I won the argument, gaining my clients around EUR 300.000.

Thanks to McCs et al.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Philthecynic on 07.05.13 20:35

Firstly apologies for inadvertently posting in a locked area.
I was reading the Facts of the day section and saw the official website mentioned and decided to have a look.

First advert is for 'THE book'. The online store sells lots of stuff almost guaranteed to locate Maddy immediately. If that doesn't work you can add a donation of 5-100 pounds to your 'Cart' Presumably if we donate enough the 'abductor' will drop her off at home and all will be well.

This is not a memorial website it is designed to sell anything you can put a picture on. It is a commercial website. The claim that donations will improve the chances of Madeleine being found alive is just rubbish. The family know this. Makes me mad, the totally cold pursuit of money by manipulation of the genuine kindness of the public.
Soon be time to pay the piper guys.

____________________
A lie can go round the world before the truth gets it's boots on.

Philthecynic

Posts : 28
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-05-06
Age : 55
Location : Sittingbourne, Kent

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by tigger on 07.05.13 21:03

@Philthecynic wrote:Firstly apologies for inadvertently posting in a locked area.
I was reading the Facts of the day section and saw the official website mentioned and decided to have a look.

First advert is for 'THE book'. The online store sells lots of stuff almost guaranteed to locate Maddy immediately. If that doesn't work you can add a donation of 5-100 pounds to your 'Cart' Presumably if we donate enough the 'abductor' will drop her off at home and all will be well.

This is not a memorial website it is designed to sell anything you can put a picture on. It is a commercial website. The claim that donations will improve the chances of Madeleine being found alive is just rubbish. The family know this. Makes me mad, the totally cold pursuit of money by manipulation of the genuine kindness of the public.
Soon be time to pay the piper guys.

I believe you have to pay for a poster of the age advanced Maddie. I would have thought that the costs in sending these to people willing to put them up should be paid by the Ltd. Co. Legitimate expenses in the search I'd have thought and would encourage people to post them up.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by Guest on 07.05.13 21:15

@tigger wrote:[...]
I believe you have to pay for a poster of the age advanced Maddie. I would have thought that the costs in sending these to people willing to put them up should be paid by the Ltd. Co. Legitimate expenses in the search I'd have thought and would encourage people to post them up.
***
You also have to pay for whatever other material, helping the "search", is available. I've also seen quite a number of complaints by people, who ordered and paid and didn't get delivered.

It's a world upside-down. They have money for the "search" - they should distribute whatever material helpful for free.

ETA apart from that, I noticed years ago, that they have quite an impressive profit margin on these products too ...

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion of ***FACTS OF THE DAY***

Post by tigger on 08.05.13 9:47

D.C. 975 Markley of Leicestershire Constabulary wrote, on a spare sheet of LC paper headed 'LEICESTERSHIRE CONSTABULARY Continuation WITNESS STATEMENT,' the following:
INFORMATION FROM THE FAMILY

I spoke to Kate McCann on Tuesday 8th of May 07. She told me that a friend of her Aunt & Uncle from Leicester had a friend that had a strong vision that Madeleine was on a boat with a man in the Marina in Lagos.

This person arrived in Portugal and has spoken to Kate. They have visited the Marina and identified the boat as "SHEARWATER". They saw a man on the boat but this was not the same man that she had in her vision.[...]
Thus Kate McCann took advantage of a gap in her busy schedule to visit Lagos Marina, some time between 4 and 8 May; an event directly associated with a matter of considerable importance to her (DC Markley points this out twice); so important in fact that she fails to describe it in her book at all [...] The nearest she comes to the subject is this: "There were a couple of 'visionary' experiences in particular I took very seriously. [..]I begged the police to look into these." She does not elaborate further.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id400.html
From: A Tense Situation by Dr Martin Roberts
20 January 2012



In view of the fact that Kate McCann can hardly have had the time (according to her own schedule in the book) to go to Lagos (they had not yet hired a car) to have a look at the Marina together with one or two psychics, why does Kate omits to mention this in the book?

Yet as can be seen in http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t4237p20-swansea-connections?highlight=swansea+connections - there were two psychics, Ms. Lazarus and Amanda Hart who flew out to PdL at the request of the McCann family members. Presumably the ones Kate mentions here.
So why not give them an honourable mention in the book?
Why go or have someone else go to Lagos to take photographs of a boat and to name this particular boat to the police? No doubt this is in the PJ files.
No doubt it came to nothing and the owner of the 'Shearwater' has proved to be blameless although a yacht and a childless woman featured at a later date in Barcelona, courtesy of those ardent investigators, Metodo3.

Amanda Hart's services were no longer required after she left PdL. In June AH reported that she'd seen a dove and Maddie was at peace. That might be it.


____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2011-07-20

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