The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Page 3 of 22 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 12 ... 22  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by mouse on 17.10.13 18:33

@tiny wrote:
@tasprin wrote:What ever time the abduction happened - 9.15 or 10.00 - there is still the question of sedation. Even the McCanns say the children were sedated but how did an abductor sedate three children without waking them? Oral or intravenous sedation would have woken them and chloroform would have left an unmistakable smell.
Sedation could very well be the reason for collusion. Fear of the consequences could have deterred them from bringing the little girl to a hospital. If she suffered a fatal injury whilst under the influence of sedatives one or more of them may have attempted to resuscitate her. It is not unknown for doctors to cover up for each other.
I agree to the doctors do cover  up for each other,but we are talking about a 3yr old little girl, what sort of people are these tapas 7 to do a thing like that unless all the children were sedated and if they were then i can see why a cover up occurred,yep Gerry and kate have got them over a barrel if this is the case.
Way, way back - don't I remember something about them saying that some of this group (not the Mccanns) had been away on holiday together before. Perhaps they had sedated/left their kids on this prev. holiday with no incidents and thought that this was the way to go on this holiday with the Mccanns -  however this time it went wrong....for what ever reason...Maddie woke sedated, felt dizzy and tripped (as you can do when you awake after taking a sleeping pill or sedation) or she had a reaction to it, or neither of these but just woke up and something else happenend...but because they'd all sedated their kiddie....Perhaps they felt a cover-up was necessary as they wouldn't want the other kids tested for medication - being Doctors....Just thinking aloud.

mouse

Posts : 327
Reputation : 42
Join date : 2013-10-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by Guest on 17.10.13 18:34

@ShuBob wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Someone asked if that was it or was there more to come, well off to Ireland next.............



Metropolitan Police@metpoliceuk 12m
DCI Redwood: "The next stage of the appeal will be in Ireland later in the month." #McCann #NSYNews
Doh I'm getting cynical again, next month!!!!  No rush then.


Doesn't  the libel trial resume next month, and ends next month.  It's now 17th October.......next month to find this man???
Next month? The tweet says later in the month i.e. later THIS month (October).
Oh Gawd, I'm losing it, sorry, and sorry SY, big grin  I apologise, but I am reading sooo many posts, my eyes aren't working big grin  Thanks for pointing it out ShuBob thumbsup 

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by Daisy on 17.10.13 18:39

@MoonGoddess wrote:had real problems with that last post??

@ intrigued89

the above give a couple of examples of cracks in the "pact"... I think the first link might give you a good idea... I personally think that maybe 1 or 2 know the truth, the others are just caught up in the whole mess... I think JT deliberately lied about 'bundleman', I now think she did see SC leave the tapas with his child in his arms and turned him into bundleman in order to promote the 'abduction'... in a nutshell, I think a couple got roped in early on [but not knowing what they were getting roped into.... if that makes sense?]
Interesting. Here's another report that backs up your theory. It comes just a week after the DM article you mention above.

 I believe they would definitely have cracked if they had been made official suspects.

Madeleine: Changes in evidence from Tapas Nine could 'dramatically change investigation'


Last updated at 10:04 09 November 2007

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492193/Madeleine-Changes-evidence-Tapas-Nine-dramatically-change-investigation.html

____________________
“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: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by ShuBob on 17.10.13 18:41

candyfloss wrote:
@ShuBob wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Someone asked if that was it or was there more to come, well off to Ireland next.............



Metropolitan Police@metpoliceuk 12m
DCI Redwood: "The next stage of the appeal will be in Ireland later in the month." #McCann #NSYNews
Doh I'm getting cynical again, next month!!!!  No rush then.


Doesn't  the libel trial resume next month, and ends next month.  It's now 17th October.......next month to find this man???
Next month? The tweet says later in the month i.e. later THIS month (October).
Oh Gawd, I'm losing it, sorry, and sorry SY, big grin   I apologise, but I am reading sooo many posts, my eyes aren't working big grin   Thanks for pointing it out ShuBob thumbsup 
You're doing grand Candy thumbsup 

The information overload the last week or so will make anyone go daft 

ShuBob

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by Guest on 17.10.13 18:43

Will you stop re-quoting my cock-up ShuBob big grin  That's what speed reading does for you, I think I need to go to specsavers.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by Guest on 17.10.13 18:48

candyfloss wrote:Will you stop re-quoting my cock-up ShuBob big grin   That's what speed reading does for you, I think I need to go to specsavers.
***
It's not your spectacles, Candyfloss. It's the amount of "information" and new posters coming left, right and center ...
Wishing you a "speedy" recovery
roses 

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by MoonGoddess on 17.10.13 18:54

@Daisy wrote:
@MoonGoddess wrote:had real problems with that last post??

@ intrigued89

the above give a couple of examples of cracks in the "pact"... I think the first link might give you a good idea... I personally think that maybe 1 or 2 know the truth, the others are just caught up in the whole mess... I think JT deliberately lied about 'bundleman', I now think she did see SC leave the tapas with his child in his arms and turned him into bundleman in order to promote the 'abduction'... in a nutshell, I think a couple got roped in early on [but not knowing what they were getting roped into.... if that makes sense?]
Interesting. Here's another report that backs up your theory. It comes just a week after the DM article you mention above.

 I believe they would definitely have cracked if they had been made official suspects.

Madeleine: Changes in evidence from Tapas Nine could 'dramatically change investigation'


Last updated at 10:04 09 November 2007

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492193/Madeleine-Changes-evidence-Tapas-Nine-dramatically-change-investigation.html
yes another interesting one Daisy.... one thing's for sure, I bet they regret ever booking that holiday!!

____________________
Not to help justice in her need would be an impiety ~Plato~

MoonGoddess

Posts : 282
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-09-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by tasprin on 17.10.13 18:55

@mouse wrote:
@tiny wrote:
@tasprin wrote:What ever time the abduction happened - 9.15 or 10.00 - there is still the question of sedation. Even the McCanns say the children were sedated but how did an abductor sedate three children without waking them? Oral or intravenous sedation would have woken them and chloroform would have left an unmistakable smell.
Sedation could very well be the reason for collusion. Fear of the consequences could have deterred them from bringing the little girl to a hospital. If she suffered a fatal injury whilst under the influence of sedatives one or more of them may have attempted to resuscitate her. It is not unknown for doctors to cover up for each other.
I agree to the doctors do cover  up for each other,but we are talking about a 3yr old little girl, what sort of people are these tapas 7 to do a thing like that unless all the children were sedated and if they were then i can see why a cover up occurred,yep Gerry and kate have got them over a barrel if this is the case.
Way, way back - don't I remember something about them saying that some of this group (not the Mccanns) had been away on holiday together before. Perhaps they had sedated/left their kids on this prev. holiday with no incidents and thought that this was the way to go on this holiday with the Mccanns -  however this time it went wrong....for what ever reason...Maddie woke sedated, felt dizzy and tripped (as you can do when you awake after taking a sleeping pill or sedation) or she had a reaction to it, or neither of these but just woke up and something else happenend...but because they'd all sedated their kiddie....Perhaps they felt a cover-up was necessary as they wouldn't want the other kids tested for medication - being Doctors....Just thinking aloud.
Yes if other members of the group were doing it they may have been sympathetic to their plight - justifying by saying 'We've all done it - why should they suffer any more'? - but at the same time worried about their own position.

tasprin

Posts : 834
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2013-01-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by Pennypennypenny on 17.10.13 19:07

Maybe one or two of the tapas 7 know but not all of them.

Pennypennypenny

Posts : 43
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by MoonGoddess on 17.10.13 19:10

@tasprin wrote:
@mouse wrote:
@tiny wrote:
@tasprin wrote:What ever time the abduction happened - 9.15 or 10.00 - there is still the question of sedation. Even the McCanns say the children were sedated but how did an abductor sedate three children without waking them? Oral or intravenous sedation would have woken them and chloroform would have left an unmistakable smell.
Sedation could very well be the reason for collusion. Fear of the consequences could have deterred them from bringing the little girl to a hospital. If she suffered a fatal injury whilst under the influence of sedatives one or more of them may have attempted to resuscitate her. It is not unknown for doctors to cover up for each other.
I agree to the doctors do cover  up for each other,but we are talking about a 3yr old little girl, what sort of people are these tapas 7 to do a thing like that unless all the children were sedated and if they were then i can see why a cover up occurred,yep Gerry and kate have got them over a barrel if this is the case.
Way, way back - don't I remember something about them saying that some of this group (not the Mccanns) had been away on holiday together before. Perhaps they had sedated/left their kids on this prev. holiday with no incidents and thought that this was the way to go on this holiday with the Mccanns -  however this time it went wrong....for what ever reason...Maddie woke sedated, felt dizzy and tripped (as you can do when you awake after taking a sleeping pill or sedation) or she had a reaction to it, or neither of these but just woke up and something else happenend...but because they'd all sedated their kiddie....Perhaps they felt a cover-up was necessary as they wouldn't want the other kids tested for medication - being Doctors....Just thinking aloud.
Yes if other members of the group were doing it they may have been sympathetic to their plight - justifying by saying 'We've all done it - why should they suffer any more'? - but at the same time worried about their own position.
just thought I'd throw in at this point, for those that don't know, KM trained as a anaesthetist #justsaying

@Mouse ...You read it in the Gaspar statements....

We planned holidays for the first week of September 2005 in Majorca, Spain, together with three other couples including Kate and Gerry. We did not know the other two couples, they were friends of Kate and Gerry’s, we had never met them before.

one of the other couples being David and Fiona Payne

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic50.html

ETA perhaps it wasn't this you were referring to as you mentioned the holiday didn't include the Mc'C's

____________________
Not to help justice in her need would be an impiety ~Plato~

MoonGoddess

Posts : 282
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-09-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by mouse on 17.10.13 19:13

@tasprin wrote:
@mouse wrote:
@tiny wrote:
@tasprin wrote:What ever time the abduction happened - 9.15 or 10.00 - there is still the question of sedation. Even the McCanns say the children were sedated but how did an abductor sedate three children without waking them? Oral or intravenous sedation would have woken them and chloroform would have left an unmistakable smell.
Sedation could very well be the reason for collusion. Fear of the consequences could have deterred them from bringing the little girl to a hospital. If she suffered a fatal injury whilst under the influence of sedatives one or more of them may have attempted to resuscitate her. It is not unknown for doctors to cover up for each other.
I agree to the doctors do cover  up for each other,but we are talking about a 3yr old little girl, what sort of people are these tapas 7 to do a thing like that unless all the children were sedated and if they were then i can see why a cover up occurred,yep Gerry and kate have got them over a barrel if this is the case.
Way, way back - don't I remember something about them saying that some of this group (not the Mccanns) had been away on holiday together before. Perhaps they had sedated/left their kids on this prev. holiday with no incidents and thought that this was the way to go on this holiday with the Mccanns -  however this time it went wrong....for what ever reason...Maddie woke sedated, felt dizzy and tripped (as you can do when you awake after taking a sleeping pill or sedation) or she had a reaction to it, or neither of these but just woke up and something else happenend...but because they'd all sedated their kiddie....Perhaps they felt a cover-up was necessary as they wouldn't want the other kids tested for medication - being Doctors....Just thinking aloud.
Yes if other members of the group were doing it they may have been sympathetic to their plight - justifying by saying 'We've all done it - why should they suffer any more'? - but at the same time worried about their own position.
And if it wasn't the Mccans Idea to sedate/leave, and if they weren't the supplier of the sedative/had the idea to leave.....Guilt all round from the others, and more significant guilt from particular members of the party.

Moongoddess - it might have been that article I can't remember...

mouse

Posts : 327
Reputation : 42
Join date : 2013-10-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by ShuBob on 17.10.13 19:13

@Pennypennypenny wrote:Maybe one or two of the tapas 7 know but not all of them.
IMO they've ALL lied one way or another- either deliberately or by omission!

ShuBob

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by ShuBob on 17.10.13 19:17

Admin please move to appropriate thread if necessary:

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

Ben's mum Kerry says they are `different cases' but `what's good enough for one family should be good enough for all' #McCann

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

Angela Smith MP welcomes new search for Madeleine #McCann but says Ben's family should receive same support so we have `level playing field'

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

MP to ask Government to fund Madeleine #McCann style investigation into disappearance of Ben Needham from Kos in 1991

ShuBob

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by mouse on 17.10.13 19:20

@ShuBob wrote:
@Pennypennypenny wrote:Maybe one or two of the tapas 7 know but not all of them.
IMO they've ALL lied one way or another- either deliberately or by omission!
Bar Diane Webster - I think she was left out of the loop. Am I right in remembering she made a very interesting statement to the PJ

mouse

Posts : 327
Reputation : 42
Join date : 2013-10-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by Guest on 17.10.13 19:22

@ShuBob wrote:Admin please move to appropriate thread if necessary:

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

Ben's mum Kerry says they are `different cases' but `what's good enough for one family should be good enough for all' #McCann

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

Angela Smith MP welcomes new search for Madeleine #McCann but says Ben's family should receive same support so we have `level playing field'

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

MP to ask Government to fund Madeleine #McCann style investigation into disappearance of Ben Needham from Kos in 1991
On the grounds of what? That two complete wastes of money make sound economic sense at a time when public services are being cut and incompetent bankers need baling out?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by Guest on 17.10.13 19:27

@ShuBob wrote:Admin please move to appropriate thread if necessary:

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

Ben's mum Kerry says they are `different cases' but `what's good enough for one family should be good enough for all' #McCann

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

Angela Smith MP welcomes new search for Madeleine #McCann but says Ben's family should receive same support so we have `level playing field'

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

MP to ask Government to fund Madeleine #McCann style investigation into disappearance of Ben Needham from Kos in 1991
No it's ok here ShuBob as it mentions Madeleine McCann case, but I will also copy it to Ben Needham forum thumbsup 

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by mouse on 17.10.13 19:31

Popcorn wrote:
@ShuBob wrote:Admin please move to appropriate thread if necessary:

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

Ben's mum Kerry says they are `different cases' but `what's good enough for one family should be good enough for all' #McCann

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

Angela Smith MP welcomes new search for Madeleine #McCann but says Ben's family should receive same support so we have `level playing field'

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

MP to ask Government to fund Madeleine #McCann style investigation into disappearance of Ben Needham from Kos in 1991
On the grounds of what? That two complete wastes of money make sound economic sense at a time when public services are being cut and incompetent bankers need baling out?
It appears Angela Smith is playing shameful politics with this...A labour MP - didn't question this when Gordon Browne was taking calls from Gerry Mccan...But the Government have set presidence on this now - so it is only to be expected....And only a matter of time before another young child goes missing and a family rightfully asks - where's our spokesman, our government help and money.

mouse

Posts : 327
Reputation : 42
Join date : 2013-10-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by endgame on 17.10.13 19:32

Popcorn wrote:
@ShuBob wrote:Admin please move to appropriate thread if necessary:

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

Ben's mum Kerry says they are `different cases' but `what's good enough for one family should be good enough for all' #McCann

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

Angela Smith MP welcomes new search for Madeleine #McCann but says Ben's family should receive same support so we have `level playing field'

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 1h

MP to ask Government to fund Madeleine #McCann style investigation into disappearance of Ben Needham from Kos in 1991
On the grounds of what? That two complete wastes of money make sound economic sense at a time when public services are being cut and incompetent bankers need baling out?
It may sound unsympathetic but I agree. Two wrongs unfortunately do not make a right. If it was wrong for the McCanns it's also wrong for the Needhams.

endgame

Posts : 171
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by Pennypennypenny on 17.10.13 19:34

I cannot for the life of me understand why David Cameron authorised the SY investigation. What was the thinking behind it? Did he think it played well with the public?

Pennypennypenny

Posts : 43
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by Guest on 17.10.13 19:37

@Pennypennypenny wrote:I cannot for the life of me understand why David Cameron authorised the SY investigation. What was the thinking behind it? Did he think it played well with the public?
Don't forget their had been a 'scoping' exercise undertaken by the previous government by Alan Johnson. I think J Gamble had something to do with it, but I may be wrong.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by ShuBob on 17.10.13 19:51

@mouse wrote:
@ShuBob wrote:
@Pennypennypenny wrote:Maybe one or two of the tapas 7 know but not all of them.
IMO they've ALL lied one way or another- either deliberately or by omission!
Bar Diane Webster - I think she was left out of the loop. Am I right in remembering she made a very interesting statement to the PJ
No. Including her IMO.

ShuBob

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by ShuBob on 17.10.13 19:55

candyfloss wrote:
@Pennypennypenny wrote:I cannot for the life of me understand why David Cameron authorised the SY investigation. What was the thinking behind it? Did he think it played well with the public?
Don't forget their had been a 'scoping' exercise undertaken by the previous government by Alan Johnson.  I think J Gamble had something to do with it, but I may be wrong.  
You are quite right.

ShuBob

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by mouse on 17.10.13 19:58

@ShuBob wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
@Pennypennypenny wrote:I cannot for the life of me understand why David Cameron authorised the SY investigation. What was the thinking behind it? Did he think it played well with the public?
Don't forget their had been a 'scoping' exercise undertaken by the previous government by Alan Johnson.  I think J Gamble had something to do with it, but I may be wrong.  
You are quite right.
Bu then J Gamble was gotten rid of by Theresa May - I don't think they hit if off too well - but then still went with this SY Review.....? Apologies - I should call it an investigation...?

mouse

Posts : 327
Reputation : 42
Join date : 2013-10-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by Jaci on 17.10.13 20:13

@mouse wrote:
@tasprin wrote:
@mouse wrote:
@tiny wrote:
@tasprin wrote:What ever time the abduction happened - 9.15 or 10.00 - there is still the question of sedation. Even the McCanns say the children were sedated but how did an abductor sedate three children without waking them? Oral or intravenous sedation would have woken them and chloroform would have left an unmistakable smell.
Sedation could very well be the reason for collusion. Fear of the consequences could have deterred them from bringing the little girl to a hospital. If she suffered a fatal injury whilst under the influence of sedatives one or more of them may have attempted to resuscitate her. It is not unknown for doctors to cover up for each other.
I agree to the doctors do cover  up for each other,but we are talking about a 3yr old little girl, what sort of people are these tapas 7 to do a thing like that unless all the children were sedated and if they were then i can see why a cover up occurred,yep Gerry and kate have got them over a barrel if this is the case.
Way, way back - don't I remember something about them saying that some of this group (not the Mccanns) had been away on holiday together before. Perhaps they had sedated/left their kids on this prev. holiday with no incidents and thought that this was the way to go on this holiday with the Mccanns -  however this time it went wrong....for what ever reason...Maddie woke sedated, felt dizzy and tripped (as you can do when you awake after taking a sleeping pill or sedation) or she had a reaction to it, or neither of these but just woke up and something else happenend...but because they'd all sedated their kiddie....Perhaps they felt a cover-up was necessary as they wouldn't want the other kids tested for medication - being Doctors....Just thinking aloud.
Yes if other members of the group were doing it they may have been sympathetic to their plight - justifying by saying 'We've all done it - why should they suffer any more'? - but at the same time worried about their own position.
And if it wasn't the Mccans Idea to sedate/leave, and if they weren't the supplier of the sedative/had the idea to leave.....Guilt all round from the others, and more significant guilt from particular members of the party.

Moongoddess - it might have been that article I can't remember...
Thank you for accepting me :) Another long time lurker. I might have made a previous account here but not too sure, I'm lousy at keeping track of things. Was posting on UK Justice Forum but it's impossible to have a decent conversation there without someone jumping on it!

Sorry, back to the topic...I could be reading this wrong but something Fiona said in her statement made me wonder if the McCann's might be sedating their children on (all) holidays but not when at home (because of Madeleine's sleeping chart on the fridge). Fiona says that on the Majorca holiday when Madeleine was only two years old and the twins six months old they slept right through the night: 

Reply
'We had a hideous time with our eldest that holiday, because she didn't sleep a wink for about two weeks, every night, so we were generally pacing around, erm, on the outside of the villa'. 

1485
Yeah'.

Reply
'At silly hours of the morning'.

1485
'And was their children'.

Reply
 'Very good'.
 
 1485
 'To sleep on time'' 
 
 Reply
 'Absolutely, they were like model children'. 
 
 1485
 'Sleeping through'' 
 
 Reply
 'Sleeping through, much to our distaste, because ours weren't. But, yeah, I mean, they, they'd always had a really good routine and Sean and Amelie at that point were incredibly, erm, you know, I think they were sleeping through actually and I think even were sleeping past when everyone else's kids were getting up, they were sort of model babies'.

Jaci

Posts : 21
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-17

View user profile http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 2 DISCUSSION**** including CRIMEWATCH UPDATE (for what it was worth)

Post by MoonGoddess on 17.10.13 20:19

@Jaci wrote:
@mouse wrote:
@tasprin wrote:
@mouse wrote:
@tiny wrote:
@tasprin wrote:What ever time the abduction happened - 9.15 or 10.00 - there is still the question of sedation. Even the McCanns say the children were sedated but how did an abductor sedate three children without waking them? Oral or intravenous sedation would have woken them and chloroform would have left an unmistakable smell.
Sedation could very well be the reason for collusion. Fear of the consequences could have deterred them from bringing the little girl to a hospital. If she suffered a fatal injury whilst under the influence of sedatives one or more of them may have attempted to resuscitate her. It is not unknown for doctors to cover up for each other.
I agree to the doctors do cover  up for each other,but we are talking about a 3yr old little girl, what sort of people are these tapas 7 to do a thing like that unless all the children were sedated and if they were then i can see why a cover up occurred,yep Gerry and kate have got them over a barrel if this is the case.
Way, way back - don't I remember something about them saying that some of this group (not the Mccanns) had been away on holiday together before. Perhaps they had sedated/left their kids on this prev. holiday with no incidents and thought that this was the way to go on this holiday with the Mccanns -  however this time it went wrong....for what ever reason...Maddie woke sedated, felt dizzy and tripped (as you can do when you awake after taking a sleeping pill or sedation) or she had a reaction to it, or neither of these but just woke up and something else happenend...but because they'd all sedated their kiddie....Perhaps they felt a cover-up was necessary as they wouldn't want the other kids tested for medication - being Doctors....Just thinking aloud.
Yes if other members of the group were doing it they may have been sympathetic to their plight - justifying by saying 'We've all done it - why should they suffer any more'? - but at the same time worried about their own position.
And if it wasn't the Mccans Idea to sedate/leave, and if they weren't the supplier of the sedative/had the idea to leave.....Guilt all round from the others, and more significant guilt from particular members of the party.

Moongoddess - it might have been that article I can't remember...
Thank you for accepting me :) Another long time lurker. I might have made a previous account here but not too sure, I'm lousy at keeping track of things. Was posting on UK Justice Forum but it's impossible to have a decent conversation there without someone jumping on it!

Sorry, back to the topic...I could be reading this wrong but something Fiona said in her statement made me wonder if the McCann's might be sedating their children on (all) holidays but not when at home (because of Madeleine's sleeping chart on the fridge). Fiona says that on the Majorca holiday when Madeleine was only two years old and the twins six months old they slept right through the night: 

Reply
'We had a hideous time with our eldest that holiday, because she didn't sleep a wink for about two weeks, every night, so we were generally pacing around, erm, on the outside of the villa'. 

1485
Yeah'.

Reply
'At silly hours of the morning'.

1485
'And was their children'.

Reply
 'Very good'.
 
 1485
 'To sleep on time'' 
 
 Reply
 'Absolutely, they were like model children'. 
 
 1485
 'Sleeping through'' 
 
 Reply
 'Sleeping through, much to our distaste, because ours weren't. But, yeah, I mean, they, they'd always had a really good routine and Sean and Amelie at that point were incredibly, erm, you know, I think they were sleeping through actually and I think even were sleeping past when everyone else's kids were getting up, they were sort of model babies'.
hi so if that was Sept 2005 ....... trying to work out how old the twins were then?

____________________
Not to help justice in her need would be an impiety ~Plato~

MoonGoddess

Posts : 282
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-09-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 22 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 12 ... 22  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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