Telling The Truth .........

by suzyjohnson 16.03.15 6:42

A great deal has been written about instances where it is believed the McCanns may have been telling lies about the events of 3 rd May, but on this thread I would like to look at the examples of where we think they have been telling us all the truth .....

Like this, from Gerry McCann after the Mother's Day service on 6 th May 2007

'We continue to hope for the best possible outcome from this for us ....... and for Madeleine'

by HelenMeg 16.03.15 9:24

suzyjohnson wrote:A great deal has been written about instances where it is believed the McCanns may have been telling lies about the events of 3 rd May, but on this thread I would like to look at the examples of where we think they have been telling us all the truth .....

Like this, from Gerry McCann after the Mother's Day service on 6 th May 2007

'We continue to hope for the best possible outcome from this for us ....... and for Madeleine'

Well,not strictly speaking a Mc Cann but a TAPAS 9 member - abd I cat rfemember the exact words ... but 'I carried her....'@JT

by jeanmonroe 16.03.15 11:22

@ HelenMeg
-------------------------------

BILTON: "From your sketch he appears to be carrying the child in a sort of unusual way."

JANE: "Yeah, I was carrying sort of across the body like that. I suppose in hindsight you'd probably think somebody would carry them more against the shoulder."

BBC Panorama 19/11/2007.

by Guest 16.03.15 11:26

David Payne: "There was nothing of that size that you could hide a, a tennis racquet in or anything like that, it would have been just purely, if they had anything…”

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

by Ayniia 17.03.15 14:57

" We have a pact. This is our matter only. It is nobody else's business" -David Payne

by suzyjohnson 21.03.15 8:56

GM on the airport bus .......'F*** off. I'm not here to enjoy myself'

by Liz Eagles 21.03.15 9:18

This was probably true.

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

Apologies for not being able to post up the screen thingy, I've tried all ways.

by Knitted 21.03.15 10:21

I have no doubt Dr. David Payne was being truthful and speaking from the heart here...(The phraseology strikes me noteworthy as it comes from an adult male acquaintance who used to bathe Madeleine and other friends' children, and whose behaviour and actions concerned Dr. K Gaspar so much she warned her husband to be 'careful and close' if/when Dr Payne bathed her own child ):

"Mmm..., errr... Madeleine's, errr... a very striking, errr... beautiful child, I'd almost - if I want a better phrase - call her doll-like, you know. She was very, you know, I think, you know, very unique looking child, errr... she'd got very pretty, you know, blonde hair, errr... in a bob, she was quite a petite, errr... child and, you know, she was very bubbly, very, errr... you know, she was a very good child to, to interact with. She was very bright, you could have a lot of fun with Madeleine, errr..."

(I just wonder what was going through his mind to account for all the 'errr's? )

by aiyoyo 21.03.15 10:33

aquila wrote:This was probably true.

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

Apologies for not being able to post up the screen thingy, I've tried all ways.

Uncle Kennedy said "this is not an appeal" right after he'd given out details on how to give money....".just go the Natwest Bank and say you'd like to give to the Madeleine Fund..... " laughat

by Naz_Nomad 21.03.15 10:43

Here is my list of when I think the McCann's have told the truth:-

There you go. That's it.

by Knitted 21.03.15 11:19

In Gerry's 10th May statement he said: "in the course of his profession, he never made any error, nor was he guilty of anything, except one time in 2000, when an unknown man entered the hospital where he worked, making incoherent threats without justification and calling out his name".

I don't doubt an incident of that type happened in 2000, so that bit if the statement is true. However I'd love to know what what drove an unknown man to turn up at his place of work and make such a scene and calling him by name?...and I'd love to know why, (since the threats were unjustified and the man was unknown), Gerry could still recall the incident 7yrs later. I have always wondered whether any old work colleagues can recall what 'allegations' might have been bandied around by the 'unknown man' and therefore if, (as Freud might suggest), Gerry's mentioning to the authorities of the (apparently forgettable) incident might instead be an example of "The unconscious need for punishment and an expression of a sense of guilt"?

by Doug D 21.03.15 11:30

Heart work or maybe something that was (wasn’t?) recorded later in CATS File 19309?

by Knitted 21.03.15 12:21

Doug D wrote:Heart work or maybe something that was (wasn’t?) recorded later in CATS File 19309?

Heart work? ...Hmmh, but he'd just stated he'd never made an error nah

So, *scratches head* it must surely be something else...??

by **Hobs** 21.03.15 14:41

Knitted wrote:
I have no doubt Dr. David Payne was being truthful and speaking from the heart here...(The phraseology strikes me noteworthy as it comes from an adult male acquaintance who used to bathe Madeleine and other friends' children, and whose behaviour and actions concerned Dr. K Gaspar so much she warned her husband to be 'careful and close' if/when Dr Payne bathed her own child ):

"Mmm..., errr... Madeleine's, errr... a very striking, errr... beautiful child, I'd almost - if I want a better phrase - call her doll-like, you know. She was very, you know, I think, you know, very unique looking child, errr... she'd got very pretty, you know, blonde hair, errr... in a bob, she was quite a petite, errr... child and, you know, she was very bubbly, very, errr... you know, she was a very good child to, to interact with. She was very bright, you could have a lot of fun with Madeleine, errr..."

(I just wonder what was going through his mind to account for all the 'errr's? )

What is more concerning and very telling is, ALL THE PAST TENSE REFERENCES.

Is she no longer any of those?

by jeanmonroe 21.03.15 15:03

Hobs wrote:
Knitted wrote:
I have no doubt Dr. David Payne was being truthful and speaking from the heart here...(The phraseology strikes me noteworthy as it comes from an adult male acquaintance who used to bathe Madeleine and other friends' children, and whose behaviour and actions concerned Dr. K Gaspar so much she warned her husband to be 'careful and close' if/when Dr Payne bathed her own child ):

"Mmm..., errr... Madeleine's, errr... a very striking, errr... beautiful child, I'd almost - if I want a better phrase - call her doll-like, you know. She was very, you know, I think, you know, very unique looking child, errr... she'd got very pretty, you know, blonde hair, errr... in a bob, she was quite a petite, errr... child and, you know, she was very bubbly, very, errr... you know, she was a very good child to, to interact with. She was very bright, you could have a lot of fun with Madeleine, errr..."

(I just wonder what was going through his mind to account for all the 'errr's? )
What is more concerning and very telling is, ALL THE PAST TENSE REFERENCES.

Is she no longer any of those?

errr?

seriously: "she'd got very pretty, you know, blonde hair, errr... in a bob...."

NOT like in the 'last photo' of her then? Or tennis court 'balls' photo? or on airport bus?

'you know, (actually, i didn't 'know') blonde hair, err... in a 'bob'?

WHEN is he referring that to?

Can only be referring to BEFORE the 'holiday'?

Anyway, what a 'weird' SPECIFIC 'thing' to say!

(imo)

by Gaggzy 21.03.15 15:54

Some great examples here of 'foot-in-mouth' disease.

Sometimes I think that if the McCanns or any Tapas member called the police and said, yes we admit it, we did it, he done this, I done that, we got rid of the body, etc, etc, etc, the Met police would tell them to stop wasting police time and casually remind them that they are not 'persons of interest.'

The clues are there in their interviews, but the gormless coppers either can't see them, or are choosing to completely ignore them.

by plebgate 21.03.15 16:06

Knitted wrote:In Gerry's 10th May statement he said: "in the course of his profession, he never made any error, nor was he guilty of anything, except one time in 2000, when an unknown man entered the hospital where he worked, making incoherent threats without justification and calling out his name".

I don't doubt an incident of that type happened in 2000, so that bit if the statement is true. However I'd love to know what what drove an unknown man to turn up at his place of work and make such a scene and calling him by name?...and I'd love to know why, (since the threats were unjustified and the man was unknown), Gerry could still recall the incident 7yrs later. I have always wondered whether any old work colleagues can recall what 'allegations' might have been bandied around by the 'unknown man' and therefore if, (as Freud might suggest), Gerry's mentioning to the authorities of the (apparently forgettable) incident might instead be an example of "The unconscious need for punishment and an expression of a sense of guilt"?

That is interesting because I would have thought that Hospital security would have been called and even the police called if incoherent threats were made, especially so because if the man had been allowed to just wander off and had possibly harmed a patient or somebody else there could have been a huge legal action taken out against the hospital.

In fact a person turning up and making INCOHERENT threats in a hospital might have made somebody call a psychiatrist to come and take a look at the person?

It sounds a very serious incident to me.

by Constablekid 21.03.15 16:24

"Find the body and prove we killed her"

"Ask the dogs Sandra"

- Gerry Mccann

by whatsupdoc 22.03.15 11:07

I saw this thread when it first appeared and thought I can't answer coz I couldn't think when the McCanns had told us something that was true.

I think that saying they jogged up that little hill and back in 19 minutes shortly after Madeleine went missing was probably true...

I did see a website that listed all the lies which I think we should put together to show how totally dishonest the pair have been.

by Joss 22.03.15 12:04

Aren't the McCann's just like politicians, every time they open their mouth.

by Guest 22.03.15 12:50

[quote="Knitted"]In Gerry's 10th May statement he said: "in the course of his profession, he never made any error, nor was he guilty of anything, except one time in 2000, when an unknown man entered the hospital where he worked, making incoherent threats without justification and calling out his name".

I don't doubt an incident of that type happened in 2000, so that bit if the statement is true. However I'd love to know what what drove an unknown man to turn up at his place of work and make such a scene and calling him by name?...and I'd love to know why, (since the threats were unjustified and the man was unknown), Gerry could still recall the incident 7yrs later. I have always wondered whether any old work colleagues can recall what 'allegations' might have been bandied around by the 'unknown man' and therefore if, (as Freud might suggest), Gerry's mentioning to the authorities of the (apparently forgettable) incident might instead be an example of "The unconscious need for punishment and an expression of a sense of guilt"?[/quote]

Isn't GM here saying he HAD made an error a/o he WAS guilty of something?

And why protest so much?
Why recall so vividly the exact year 2000?

Threats INCOHERENT?
Incoherent about WHAT?

Without justification?
What threats, who is to judge whether they were justified or not?

A man, unknown to whom?
To Gerry?
But that man certainly knew HIM, even calling him by name!

Unknown to bystanders inside that hospital in 2000?
Could be

Can it be, that a man, known to GM but not to possible bystanders in the hospital where he was present, entered and, finding GM, accosted him in the presence of others, demanding an explanation for things this 'unknown' man knew could be laid at the feet of GM?

And that his remonstrances could only be explained away -whitewashed if you like- to these bystanders, by labeling them 'unjustified'?

Where WAS GM in 2000?
IIRC at some point in his career he upped sticks and moved south.
Could there be a connection?

by jeanmonroe 22.03.15 13:25

Q: "Where WAS GM in 2000?"

A: Who cares?
-------------------------------------

the more pertinent, and relevent, imo, question should be: "where was GM at 4am, 4th May 2007"?

If you'll 'recall' this was the 'time' HE 'went out again' with only DP. (DP sworn 'statement')

Prior to this he (GM) had asked a GNR officer 'do you know where a church is?'

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

"He only had direct contact with the couple (McCann couple? GM say only him and Payne) and their friends (friends, 'plural? DP says, in statements, ONLY 'himself and GM)) at about 04.00 when Gerry McCann approached the GNR group of which he was a member to ask whether there was a church close by. He replied to him in English, giving the directions to a nearby church."

Anyway,

The same DP who you'll recall, when asked by DC 1485 MESSIAH (Leicestershire Police) "Is there anything that you consider pertinent or relevant to establish the material truth?'' (about a 3 years old child's 'disappearance')

'replied'

"Err the, there are a few things but I don't think this is the right forum for bringing those up.'
--------------------------------------------------------

Now, call me stoopid, but would DP have been 'allowed' to even get out of the 'room' (in a REAL 'investigation') WITHOUT 'explaining' 'the few things' he considered 'pertinent and relevent' to 'establish the MATERIAL TRUTH'? (about a 3 years old child's 'disappearance')

Perhaps DCI Wall will 'ask' him about the 'few things' he 'knows'.

and then i 'woke up'!

Perhaps M Brunt will 'ask' him?

Oh no, 'forgetting' DP is a MAN, supposedly, although very, very, 'unhelpful' in helping to 'find' his friend's er, 'missing' child, not a widowed FEMALE pensioner.

by lj 23.03.15 0:46

Knitted wrote:In Gerry's 10th May statement he said: "in the course of his profession, he never made any error, nor was he guilty of anything, except one time in 2000, when an unknown man entered the hospital where he worked, making incoherent threats without justification and calling out his name".

I don't doubt an incident of that type happened in 2000, so that bit if the statement is true. However I'd love to know what what drove an unknown man to turn up at his place of work and make such a scene and calling him by name?...and I'd love to know why, (since the threats were unjustified and the man was unknown), Gerry could still recall the incident 7yrs later. I have always wondered whether any old work colleagues can recall what 'allegations' might have been bandied around by the 'unknown man' and therefore if, (as Freud might suggest), Gerry's mentioning to the authorities of the (apparently forgettable) incident might instead be an example of "The unconscious need for punishment and an expression of a sense of guilt"?

A doctor who says he never made an error is lying, period.

Maybe he is never sued, that is different form not making mistakes. I have said several times before you don't end up in the radioactive imaging department because have excellent clinical or diagnostic skills, or bedside manners.

by lj 23.03.15 0:52

Constablekid wrote:"Find the body and prove we killed her"

"Ask the dogs Sandra"

- Gerry Mccann

Those are good ones!

by suzyjohnson 24.03.15 10:28

lj wrote:
Knitted wrote:In Gerry's 10th May statement he said: "in the course of his profession, he never made any error, nor was he guilty of anything, except one time in 2000, when an unknown man entered the hospital where he worked, making incoherent threats without justification and calling out his name".

He didn't resemble Tannerman at all did he?