Re: New Heights of insanity - Express

by canada12 06.11.13 21:31

Can you think of a plausible tale that would absolve the parents of any responsibility of a child's death while they were absent from the apartment and had left said child (a 3 year old) alone and unsupervised?

by plebgate 06.11.13 22:10

StraightThinking wrote:While I recognize the deductive talents of many posters on here, I suspect that some others have deliberately introduced irrelevant theories just to have a laugh at everyone's expense

These are the real trolls, not the occasional poster who turns up for the first time and is driven away within hours by aggressive behaviour from others

The real trolls subtly drop their "clever" observations into the discussion and then sit back, convulsed in hysterics, watching everyone else debating the nonsense

Anyone remember "The Author" from the Mirror Forum? Great fun but meaningless tripe

You can link anyone to anything if you make the daisy chain long enough, it doesn't mean the connections are being used to cover a crime

I used to like the Author's posts, very good.

Re. the real trolls, not the occasional poster who turns up and is driven away, you say in your post Straighthinking.   I think there have been a fair number of posters who have turned up trolling. They have not been driven away within hours by aggressive behaviour from others imo, they have over stepped the mark many times and have been banned (possibly).

You say that you suspect that some posters have deliberately introduced irrelevant theories ....... and then have sat back and had a laugh.

Even if they have, imo they have ensured that people keep coming to the site to deliberate and think some more about the case.   Keeping people wanting to know more is a good thing for Maddie imo

Anybody with an ounce of intelligence can suss out the irrelevant theories, they can also suss out the trolls, all we can do as invididuals is keep posting our own thoughts and show those who have been brave enough to stand their ground that they have our support.

I think Tony touched a nerve with some of his recent posts and yes, I agree, he did get a bit sarcastic with some, but when you have relatively new posters trying to state with some authority what their views are without seemingly having even read the files, it would make anyone a bit "sarky".

I also noticed one or two new posters agree with each others posts i.e. great post, I agree.    Do they really think we cannot see what they are doing.

Well done Mr. A, Well Done TB they stood their ground and continue to do so and continue, imo, to get some people really rather pee'd off.

by soundworks 06.11.13 22:15

ultimaThule wrote:
soundworks wrote:Yea im thinking simple

Kate screams Madeleine gone - runs to restaurant in shock

All tapas run back to apartment - Madeleine found dead behind sofa ( been there from when they Kate and Gerry first went out)

30 mins to sort stuff out - only needs a quick clean behind sofa / timelines etc

Gerry phones an accomplice and takes Madeleine out down the road at 10ish to meet accomplice who then hides Madeleine temporarily
Why would the body of a child who met with fatal accidental injury need to be hidden?

Do you not think that a group who could collectively agree to hide a body, clean an apartment to an almost forensic standard by removing all traces of the child's existence without leaving any discernible wet patches or odour of detergent(s), and conjure up an accomplice to temporarily hide/store the corpse in the space of half an hour, would be capable of concocting a plausible tale which would absolve the parents of any culpability if the accident occurred while they were absent from the apartment?

I blame the mccanns 100%

they sedated their children and left them

yes i do think they could have cleaned up the blood behind the sofa then pushed the sofa up over the cleaning up,

hence the quickly scribbled timelines and Gerry being seen walking at 10pm

If it happened earlier then why be seen at 10pm when you could have easily organised getting rid of the body any other time during the night etc when less folks about

i just cannot believe that the mccanns and other tapas could casually go to dinner if something had happened before - like i said on an earlier post id be distraught

bloody hell if my dog went missing i would be everywhere searching for him - especially during the night

by Guest 06.11.13 22:37

plebgate wrote:
StraightThinking wrote:While I recognize the deductive talents of many posters on here, I suspect that some others have deliberately introduced irrelevant theories just to have a laugh at everyone's expense

These are the real trolls, not the occasional poster who turns up for the first time and is driven away within hours by aggressive behaviour from others

The real trolls subtly drop their "clever" observations into the discussion and then sit back, convulsed in hysterics, watching everyone else debating the nonsense

Anyone remember "The Author" from the Mirror Forum? Great fun but meaningless tripe

You can link anyone to anything if you make the daisy chain long enough, it doesn't mean the connections are being used to cover a crime
I used to like the Author's posts, very good.

Re. the real trolls, not the occasional poster who turns up and is driven away, you say in your post Straighthinking.   I think there have been a fair number of posters who have turned up trolling. They have not been driven away within hours by aggressive behaviour from others imo, they have over stepped the mark many times and have been banned (possibly).

You say that you suspect that some posters have deliberately introduced irrelevant theories ....... and then have sat back and had a laugh.

Even if they have, imo they have ensured that people keep coming to the site to deliberate and think some more about the case.   Keeping people wanting to know more is a good thing for Maddie imo

Anybody with an ounce of intelligence can suss out the irrelevant theories, they can also suss out the trolls, all we can do as invididuals is keep posting our own thoughts and show those who have been brave enough to stand their ground that they have our support.

I think Tony touched a nerve with some of his recent posts and yes, I agree, he did get a bit sarcastic with some, but when you have relatively new posters trying to state with some authority what their views are without seemingly having even read the files, it would make anyone a bit "sarky".

I also noticed one or two new posters agree with each others posts i.e. great post, I agree.    Do they really think we cannot see what they are doing.

Well done Mr. A, Well Done TB they stood their ground and continue to do so and continue, imo, to get some people really rather pee'd off.

Well said plebgate, thank you.
Tony has been through the mill this year and I'm not surprised if he gets a bit sarky with some time-wasters.

by ProfMoriarty 06.11.13 22:51

Timewasters? Is that not a bit strong?
It seems to me as a newbie on here that some of the recent posts on this thread get very close indeed to the most plausible account of what took place those years ago and what fuels the ongoing shenanigans.
When someone takes the time to craft longish posts examining or re-examining elements of the case in a polite manner that's hardly time wasting, other than their own time.
Anyway, as one who has been hoofed off many forums over the years on this very topic and hope to be again, I am pleased to note that there is so much sense on here and so little (so far) nasty McCannery.
When that comes along I'll kick it to death. That'll be the cue for a ban.
However, sorry for interrupting the current flow.

by ultimaThule 06.11.13 22:55

soundworks wrote:I blame the mccanns 100%
You are not alone in holding the McCanns fully responsible for the disappearance of their daughter.

they sedated their children and left them
You can't claim what you don't know for a fact.

yes i do think they could have cleaned up the blood behind the sofa then pushed the sofa up over the cleaning up,
Depending on the amount of blood, it may not have taken more than a few minutes to mop it up but getting a marble floor dry on a cold night, washing curtains, removing every trace of the child's DNA from the apartment, and washing and dressing the corpse - and presumably drying her hair and disguising the wound if she sustained a head injury - would take considerably longer than the 20-25 minutes which elapsed from the time the Tapas 9's table was seen to be unoccupied apart from Diane Webster and the time it would have taken GM to reach the point where he was sighted by the Smiths - presupposing he was.

hence the quickly scribbled timelines and Gerry being seen walking at 10pm
The timelines written on the cover of Madeleine's holiday sticker book don't look 'scribbled' to me. On the contary, given that many doctors have notoriously difficult to read handwriting, it doesn't look as if they were written in any kind of rush.

If it happened earlier then why be seen at 10pm when you could have easily organised getting rid of the body any other time during the night etc when less folks about
Unless the body was disposed of considerably earlier, it had to be done on an occasion when all of the Tapas 9 were present to alibi each other, and in a public place at a time when the attention of others would not be unduly drawn to the group.

i just cannot believe that the mccanns and other tapas could casually go to dinner if something had happened before - like i said on an earlier post id be distraught
Just because you can't believe others can act casually or normally following the death of a child, doesn't mean that others can't and the occasions when they've done so are far too numerous to mention here.

bloody hell if my dog went missing i would be everywhere searching for him - especially during the night
As would I, and as I have done when he went missing for an hour during the day before being found on the doorstep of his new ladylove. I've lost count of the number of times I've searched through the night for my cat, only to discover him sat in his favourite spot in the kitchen, or fast asleep on the sofa on my broken-hearted fearing the worst return home.

by justathought 06.11.13 22:58

ProfMoriarty wrote:Timewasters? Is that not a bit strong?
It seems to me as a newbie on here that some of the recent posts on this thread get very close indeed to the most plausible account of what took place those years ago and what fuels the ongoing shenanigans.
When someone takes the time to craft longish posts examining or re-examining elements of the case in a polite manner that's hardly time wasting, other than their own time.
Anyway, as one who has been hoofed off many forums over the years on this very topic and hope to be again, I am pleased to note that there is so much sense on here and so little (so far) nasty McCannery.
When that comes along I'll kick it to death. That'll be the cue for a ban.
However, sorry for interrupting the current flow.

could even be that new members looking at things differently has added weight to the forum? especially as there have been new developments and some long standing theories have to revised.

by ProfessorPPlum 06.11.13 23:05

Don't forget that all of us are armchair warriors in comparison with Tony. It could be argued that he's the only one here who has earned the right to a view on all of this. Newcomers might no be aware of how much Tony has suffered at the hands of the vicious McCann machine. I don't endorse rudeness and I don't agree with him on a lot but I respect that he's put himself on the line in person for his beliefs - something I'm not sure I have the courage to do.

by Guest 06.11.13 23:18

ProfessorPPlum wrote:Don't forget that all of us are armchair warriors in comparison with Tony. It could be argued that he's the only one here who has earned the right to a view on all of this. Newcomers might no be aware of how much Tony has suffered at the hands of the vicious McCann machine. I don't endorse rudeness and I don't agree with him on a lot but I respect that he's put himself on the line in person for his beliefs - something I'm not sure I have the courage to do.

***
I second that.

by chillyheat 06.11.13 23:41

Châtelaine wrote:
ProfessorPPlum wrote:Don't forget that all of us are armchair warriors in comparison with Tony. It could be argued that he's the only one here who has earned the right to a view on all of this. Newcomers might no be aware of how much Tony has suffered at the hands of the vicious McCann machine. I don't endorse rudeness and I don't agree with him on a lot but I respect that he's put himself on the line in person for his beliefs - something I'm not sure I have the courage to do.
***
I second that.

I thirded that big grin

by Okeydokey 07.11.13 0:00

soundworks wrote:Yea im thinking simple

Kate screams Madeleine gone - runs to restaurant in shock

All tapas run back to apartment - Madeleine found dead behind sofa ( been there from when they Kate and Gerry first went out)

30 mins to sort stuff out - only needs a quick clean behind sofa / timelines etc

Gerry phones an accomplice and takes Madeleine out down the road at 10ish to meet accomplice who then hides Madeleine temporarily

The KISS* principle may work here. I am keeping an open mind. But the Simple (Amaral, really) version has a lot of merits. It explains -

1. Why they could enjoy their meal so naturally.

2. Why they could not put off staging the abduction - it had to be done there and then (because the commotion was genuine and alerted both DW and the waiters).

3. Why the MO version of his 9.30 visit sounds so shaky (if it didn't happen).

4. Why they had to scribble the timelines in such haste on the back of drawing books.

5. Why the clean up was not (for doctors) entirely thorough.

6. Why the JT sighting was necessary.

What are the theoretical problems with it?

Where was the body taken ? If it was the apartment of a friend that is one hell of a call! Or was it an empty property somewhere to which one of the Tapas 9 had access? Less unlikely perhaps.

Of course it doesn't really explain some of the odd behaviour prior to 3rd May.

*Keep It Simple Stupid!

by Sietah 07.11.13 0:27

soundworks wrote:
i just cannot believe that the mccanns and other tapas could casually go to dinner if something had happened before - like i said on an earlier post id be distraught

Excuse my bad English, but ever since I was on the mirror forum that bothered me. Now I think they (most of them) didn't know. They thought they, being loyal or empathic or just kind, covered up a little lie. Than they discovered it was more than a little lie but felt trapped or in denial. The time they found out it was really bad they were already so deep in it that it felt there is no point of return. And now they are dragged in so deep, more to loose than ever.

I also don't like the consparicy theorys, like there was a holidaymaker who has a nephew that has a neigbour whose son is an Everton-fan ánd bought a new freezer. But still I think these theory's can lead to something important/ other insights.

For example I loved to play Nintendo Mario with my son. But he always annoyed me by not following the obvious straight way. I was so impatient when he made strange jumps, run the wrong way... but he found all the warpzones and credits. Sometimes brainstorming can look it goes too far and nowhere, but sometimes that is needed to find the simple "Eureka" moment. imho/

by ultimaThule 07.11.13 0:33

canada12 wrote:Can you think of a plausible tale that would absolve the parents of any responsibility of a child's death while they were absent from the apartment and had left said child (a 3 year old) alone and unsupervised?

For myself, no. I would be compelled to tell the truth and I would be so filled with remorse and shame that any punishment would be welcome, although this would in no way alleviate the feelings of guilt and utter disgust with myself I would harbour for the rest of my life - presupposing that after making such a catastrophic error of judgement, and/or committing an act of such extreme selfishness, I chose to live out my natural lifespan.

For such as the McCanns, easily. If their friends were not willing to affirm that one or the other parent had been in the apartment at all times, all they had to to do was wait until the actual time of death could not be established with any certainty as per the post (below) I made on another thread:

"Had Madeleine died as a result of accidental injury, any delay in notifying the authorities could be explained by her parents both being doctors who are competent to certify death and who were aware that, once the appropriate authorities were alerted, she would immediately be removed to a mortuary to await autopsy, a prospect which would be worsened by the thought of her being alone far from home and in a foreign country.

Under those circumstances, it would be entirely understandable if the McCanns delayed parting with the body of their beloved child who succumbed to accidental death which autopsy would undoubtedly confirm, and I have no doubt their friends would have supported this account by affirming that Madeleine's distraught parents had to be gently persuaded over a period of hours, if not days, to make the necessary call with none of them wishing to be the one who hastened the inevitable.

In short, had they not been present at the time their eldest daughter sustained accidental fatal injury, the McCanns would have had no difficulty hiding the fact that they were absent when she died, or finding reason to delay until time of death could not be determined with any accuracy"

If above scenario had occurred in the UK, I have no doubt the parents would be treated with the utmost sympathy and the Coroner's verdict would most probably contained words such as those often used at inquests into the accidental death of children where parents are encouraged not to blame themselves for any lapse in the attention they customarily gave their offspring, or similar.

Also, in part from the post I refer to (above), the stark "fact is that there can be only one reason why Madeleine's body was concealed, which is that the findings of an autopsy would have caused the McCanns to account for her death in a court of law with all that entails, including the potential removal of the twins from their care, being struck off the Medical Register etc.

If Madeleine died of an overdose of non-prescribed medication administered by one or other of her parents in order that they could leave their child/ren home alone for hours, and if their friends were also medicating their offspring with similar intent, the findings of autopsy could lead to her siblings and the other children in the group being tested to see whether they had also ingested non-prescribed drugs and this scenario may explain the infamous 'pact'.

However, tempted as I am to believe that the Tapas 9 are all in it up to their necks, it's possible that if Madeleine died as a result of non-accidental injury/injuries the McCanns may not have revealed the truth to all of their friends and some may have colluded in a cover-up without being fully aware of the circumstances of her death."

Accidents happen. Many children in the UK die as a result of accidental injury and some of these accidents occur when a parent is occupied in another room, or preoccupied with their other children. As this is true of other countries, there's no reason to suppose the McCanns would not have been treated as sympathetically in Portugal as they would have been in the UK if Madeleine had met with accidental death.

Once again, I repeat that I will never buy into any theory that has the McCanns panicked into speedy disposal of a body and, IMO, anyone positing this theory has either failed to read the files or is wilfully or woefully ignorant of the full extent of the nature of those such as the McCanns.

by ultimaThule 07.11.13 0:43

ChillyHeat wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
ProfessorPPlum wrote:Don't forget that all of us are armchair warriors in comparison with Tony. It could be argued that he's the only one here who has earned the right to a view on all of this. Newcomers might no be aware of how much Tony has suffered at the hands of the vicious McCann machine. I don't endorse rudeness and I don't agree with him on a lot but I respect that he's put himself on the line in person for his beliefs - something I'm not sure I have the courage to do.
***
I second that.
I thirded that

All Hail, Tony thumbsup

We need a Caesar's wreath of laurel leaves emoticon to crown him with, or a depiction of Daniel walking into the lion's den to mark his bravery and I look forward to the day he emerges victorious.

by chillyheat 07.11.13 0:49

Pièce de résistance......Quite possibly.

Irishman Martin Smith and members of his family saw a man carrying a child in his arms at about 10pm, about 45 minutes after the Tanner sighting. However, he was not asked to help produce a photofit. The Met refuses to discuss the details but it is expected that officers will approach Mr Smith and his family for help. Yard experts are looking at ways of improving the images to end with one pristine likeness of the “suspect”.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t4530-new-photo-clue-to-madeleine-mccann-case

by Sietah 07.11.13 0:53

Sietah wrote:
soundworks wrote:
i just cannot believe that the mccanns and other tapas could casually go to dinner if something had happened before - like i said on an earlier post id be distraught
Excuse my bad English, but ever since I was on the mirror forum that bothered me. Now I think they (most of them) didn't know. They thought they, being loyal or empathic or just kind, covered up a little lie. Than they discovered it was more than a little lie but felt trapped or in denial. The time they found out it was really bad they were already so deep in it that it felt there is no point of return. And now they are dragged in so deep, more to loose than ever.

I also don't like the consparicy theorys, like there was a holidaymaker who has a nephew that has a neigbour whose son is an Everton-fan ánd bought a new freezer. But still I think these theory's can lead to something important/ other insights.

For example I loved to play Nintendo Mario with my son. But he always annoyed me by not following the obvious straight way. I was so impatient when he made strange jumps, run the wrong way... but he found all the warpzones and credits. Sometimes brainstorming can look it goes too far and nowhere, but sometimes that is needed to find the simple "Eureka" moment. imho/

It is not that I want to quote myself to feel important, but I forgot to add that personal feelings can play a big role. There are rational and emotional people here , all with there own live experiences. I count myself as the emo-type and I don't think there is something wrong with neither, but they sure can clash.
I think we have to keep it simple too, but if I am honest, coloured with my experiences, I think sexual abuse by people that are supposed to love her is possible. The make-up pics make me shiver, while others think etc. etc. etc.

by Guest 07.11.13 5:29

admin wrote:
plebgate wrote:
StraightThinking wrote:While I recognize the deductive talents of many posters on here, I suspect that some others have deliberately introduced irrelevant theories just to have a laugh at everyone's expense

These are the real trolls, not the occasional poster who turns up for the first time and is driven away within hours by aggressive behaviour from others

The real trolls subtly drop their "clever" observations into the discussion and then sit back, convulsed in hysterics, watching everyone else debating the nonsense

Anyone remember "The Author" from the Mirror Forum? Great fun but meaningless tripe

You can link anyone to anything if you make the daisy chain long enough, it doesn't mean the connections are being used to cover a crime
I used to like the Author's posts, very good.

Re. the real trolls, not the occasional poster who turns up and is driven away, you say in your post Straighthinking.   I think there have been a fair number of posters who have turned up trolling. They have not been driven away within hours by aggressive behaviour from others imo, they have over stepped the mark many times and have been banned (possibly).

You say that you suspect that some posters have deliberately introduced irrelevant theories ....... and then have sat back and had a laugh.

Even if they have, imo they have ensured that people keep coming to the site to deliberate and think some more about the case.   Keeping people wanting to know more is a good thing for Maddie imo

Anybody with an ounce of intelligence can suss out the irrelevant theories, they can also suss out the trolls, all we can do as invididuals is keep posting our own thoughts and show those who have been brave enough to stand their ground that they have our support.

I think Tony touched a nerve with some of his recent posts and yes, I agree, he did get a bit sarcastic with some, but when you have relatively new posters trying to state with some authority what their views are without seemingly having even read the files, it would make anyone a bit "sarky".

I also noticed one or two new posters agree with each others posts i.e. great post, I agree.    Do they really think we cannot see what they are doing.

Well done Mr. A, Well Done TB they stood their ground and continue to do so and continue, imo, to get some people really rather pee'd off.
Well said plebgate, thank you.
Tony has been through the mill this year and I'm not surprised if he gets a bit sarky with some time-wasters.

I absolutely agree with all you have said plebgate, I've always read Tony's posts with interest he certainly keeps the grey matter ticking over in the search for truth and justice for Madeleine.

Admin said Tony has been through the mill, imo if anyone had been through a quarter of what Tony has then they maybe a little more understanding won't go amiss. Having read through the posts I've thought Tony your banghead

Although we all have our own opinions and respect opinions of others there are just some people you can't get through to.

by bellum 07.11.13 6:48

What makes me believe that it was Madeleine that night is the fact that children cry when they feel cold or they don't fall asleep.
That father was not concerned about a pneumonia or a heavy cold.

by jowie 07.11.13 8:48

ultimaThule wrote:
ChillyHeat wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
ProfessorPPlum wrote:Don't forget that all of us are armchair warriors in comparison with Tony. It could be argued that he's the only one here who has earned the right to a view on all of this. Newcomers might no be aware of how much Tony has suffered at the hands of the vicious McCann machine. I don't endorse rudeness and I don't agree with him on a lot but I respect that he's put himself on the line in person for his beliefs - something I'm not sure I have the courage to do.
***
I second that.
I thirded that

All Hail, Tony

We need a Caesar's wreath of laurel leaves emoticon to crown him with, or a depiction of Daniel walking into the lion's den to mark his bravery and I look forward to the day he emerges victorious.

As you will see I really don't have time to enter into a debate because I cannot spend much time here. I really read as much as I can as often as I can. What I can say is that I have been a staunch supporter of Tony since the very beginning and have spread his word far and wide. I have contributed in small ways behind the scene and took time off work to attend the Royal Courts of Justice for 2 days to give him the strength and support he needed to get through it.

So it is quite difficult for me to say this, as I am really really not a confrontational person but I find it quite strange that Tony has taken an about turn with regard to the Smith sightings. It does not seem the same man to me. It may be that I am reading too deep into his recent comments but he is suggesting , and in a manner that I don't recongnise of Tony, that the McCanns have never suppressed the sightings- and now that the Smiths are making it all up to cover for Murat - contrary to what he says in his booklet.

Sorry, Tony, perhaps you can respond - to get my confused mind back on track. Rushing off now but will log in later for any backlash:)

by bellum 07.11.13 9:22

It seems that the GNR dogs lost the traces to Madeleine that night. I wonder if somebody of the Tapas had a bucket with sea water and wetted her body. It is known that sea water destroy scents.

by bellum 07.11.13 9:45

when my-son-in-law drowned, it was a shock. I drove one and a half hour to my daughter's home and I found her in control of herself. You could not see in her that such a tragedy had happened.
She had a lot to do, like warning people. We talked a lot. 24 hours later she broke down.
It is possible that the same happened to the McCanns, for a couple of hours. People in shock can react normally, also in war, when they are trying to survive.

by **PeterMac** 07.11.13 10:57

bellum wrote:when my-son-in-law drowned, it was a shock. I drove one and a half hour to my daughter's home and I found her in control of herself. You could not see in her that such a tragedy had happened.
She had a lot to do, like warning people. We talked a lot. 24 hours later she broke down.
It is possible that the same happened to the McCanns, for a couple of hours. People in shock can react normally, also in war, when they are trying to survive.

Indeed. When my brother died I did the professional detachment thing for two days, organising viewing at the Chapel of Rest for my parents, dealing with the Coroner's Officer and so on.
But later . . . !
I did not eat for at least a week, and the physical pain in the centre of the chest is the reason why the expression "Broken heart" has entered the language.

by Guest 07.11.13 11:26

It took me 3 years to be able to talk about my late husband without crying. The first days after his death, I was able to organise everything with cold-hearted precision and control. Like a robot. At the funeral I was even comforting friends, who were crying. But then ...

by sallypelt 07.11.13 11:38

PeterMac wrote:
bellum wrote:when my-son-in-law drowned, it was a shock. I drove one and a half hour to my daughter's home and I found her in control of herself. You could not see in her that such a tragedy had happened.
She had a lot to do, like warning people. We talked a lot. 24 hours later she broke down.
It is possible that the same happened to the McCanns, for a couple of hours. People in shock can react normally, also in war, when they are trying to survive.
Indeed. When my brother died I did the professional detachment thing for two days, organising viewing at the Chapel of Rest for my parents, dealing with the Coroner's Officer and so on.
But later . . . !
I did not eat for at least a week, and the physical pain in the centre of the chest is the reason why the expression "Broken heart" has entered the language.

Exactly, PeterMac. That lump of lead in the chest, and the feeling of hopelessness that one feels. As members on here have said, there's a funeral to arrange, and one does that on automatic pilot, and in a state of "controlled limbo", but once the funeral is over, and everyone goes back to their daily routines, that's when the numbness goes, and the uncontrollable crying begins. For me, it went on, every day for months and months. I would be driving in my car and my eyes felt like they were holding back a dam, and all of a sudden, regardless where I was, the tears would just burst out.
So, I find it rather odd, that someone, who has lost a child, can stay focused and controlled when giving an interview. I have to question whether that person is on some sort of medication.

by columbostogeys 07.11.13 12:35

sallypelt wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
bellum wrote:when my-son-in-law drowned, it was a shock. I drove one and a half hour to my daughter's home and I found her in control of herself. You could not see in her that such a tragedy had happened.
She had a lot to do, like warning people. We talked a lot. 24 hours later she broke down.
It is possible that the same happened to the McCanns, for a couple of hours. People in shock can react normally, also in war, when they are trying to survive.
Indeed. When my brother died I did the professional detachment thing for two days, organising viewing at the Chapel of Rest for my parents, dealing with the Coroner's Officer and so on.
But later . . . !
I did not eat for at least a week, and the physical pain in the centre of the chest is the reason why the expression "Broken heart" has entered the language.
Exactly, PeterMac. That lump of lead in the chest, and the feeling of hopelessness that one feels. As members on here have said, there's a funeral to arrange, and one does that on automatic pilot, and in a state of "controlled limbo", but once the funeral is over, and everyone goes back to their daily routines, that's when the numbness goes, and the uncontrollable crying begins. For me, it went on, every day for months and months. I would be driving in my car and my eyes felt like they were holding back a dam, and all of a sudden, regardless where I was, the tears would just burst out.
So, I find it rather odd, that someone, who has lost a child, can stay focused and controlled when giving an interview. I have to question whether that person is on some sort of medication.

Really agree with that I would have been a basket case, leaving everything to my husband to deal with if it was my child.

Although can you ever really tell by someones interview and how they actually behave I knew these people were guilty also Shannon Mathews too its just body language is off for me:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxq6Zvr8mPY

Log in for more topics