The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi!

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

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.


Jill Havern
Forum owner

help needed

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: help needed

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 06.02.14 8:56

@tigger wrote:@Suep

Had that been the case there would have been no need for Payne to lie about seeing the children.
Your theory also doesn't explain the telephone traffic that week, the Murat connection and a host of other events. and most of all doesn't explain the two photos, photoshopped and printed  in the intervening two hours.
All this is based on is someone saying they heard a scream. Imo the accident theory on the night of the 3rd won't fly, although it is much beloved by apologists for the McCanns.

Oh yes, I probably should have mentioned that if you don't go with the "death before the 3rd" theory, somebody - usually one of a few people - will pop up and accuse you of being an "apologist for the McCanns".

@tigger wrote:
Salcedas first says that he heard a scream from a woman he did not know. If they'd been at the Tapas every night how come he didn't know Kate?

Or maybe, just maybe, Salcedas was not an expert at identifying people purely from their screams.

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by tigger on 06.02.14 10:05

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@tigger wrote:@Suep

Had that been the case there would have been no need for Payne to lie about seeing the children.
Your theory also doesn't explain the telephone traffic that week, the Murat connection and a host of other events. and most of all doesn't explain the two photos, photoshopped and printed  in the intervening two hours.
All this is based on is someone saying they heard a scream. Imo the accident theory on the night of the 3rd won't fly, although it is much beloved by apologists for the McCanns.

Oh yes, I probably should have mentioned that if you don't go with the "death before the 3rd" theory, somebody - usually one of a few people - will pop up and accuse you of being an "apologist for the McCanns".

@tigger wrote:
Salcedas first says that he heard a scream from a woman he did not know. If they'd been at the Tapas every night how come he didn't know Kate?

Or maybe, just maybe, Salcedas was not an expert at identifying people purely from their screams.

He did identify the woman as one he did not know, presumably he would have known the screams of women he did know.
He also doesn't say whether he saw the woman at the time. It's a peculiar statement.

I do indeed not believe in the accident on the night and sudden discovery and incredibly fast worked plan, whether it started at 9.30 or 10.00 pm, they had about 70 minutes or 40 minutes before the police was contacted. After that all bets were off for how soon would the police arrive? Could be anywhere from 5 to 20 minutes. The latter being the case.
Salcedas also talks about having joked with DW about them all leaving her alone. Iirc the tennis coach gave the same account of having joked about this with DW.

If you can explain the ready-to-go photographs on the night to start of with - factor in the Smiths sighting and fit in ALL the witness statements from that evening I'd be very interested.

I did not accuse Suep (why are you answering for her?) of being an apologist, having read the files about twenty times over, I gave my reasons for doubting her theory. I added a simple statement of fact about apologists, you may not agree.
As I addressed my post to Suep, I shall wait to hear her answer first-hand.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 26
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by tiny on 06.02.14 10:27

Found what I was looking for re charlotte pennington on the Truth Of Lie blog,it from the daily mail article dated  25th September 2007,thanks for all your help

  so why would she lie about entering the apartment when in her statement she said she didn't enter the apartment,i think this girl needs to be re-interviewed

tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 06.02.14 10:43

@tigger wrote:
He did identify the woman as one he did not know, presumably he would have known the screams of women he did know.
He also doesn't say whether he saw the woman at the time. It's a peculiar statement.

The only peculiar statement here is that people know the screams of women they know.

@tigger wrote:
I do indeed not believe in the accident on the night and sudden discovery and incredibly fast worked plan, whether it started at 9.30 or 10.00 pm, they had about 70 minutes or 40 minutes before the police was contacted. After that all bets were off for how soon would the police arrive? Could be anywhere from 5 to 20 minutes. The latter being the case.
Salcedas also talks about having joked with DW about them all leaving her alone. Iirc the tennis coach gave the same account of having joked about this with DW.

None of this invalidates the theory that Maddy died on the evening of May 3rd and that her body was disposed of in a panic.  None of it even suggests that it isn't a probable sequence of events.

@tigger wrote:
If you can explain the ready-to-go photographs on the night to start of with - factor in the Smiths sighting and fit in  ALL the witness statements from that evening I'd be very interested.

I have lots of 'ready-to-go' photographs of my children with me at all times, but I'm not planning to have either of them disappear.  Ready-to-go photographs prove nothing, and suggest nothing.

I agree with the theory that the Smith sighting was Gerry McCann, and that this is possible because the alarm was raised much earlier than 10pm, as indicated by several witness statements.

If you can invalidate this theory please do so with specifics, and I'll be happy to address each point.

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by tigger on 06.02.14 10:55

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@tigger wrote:
He did identify the woman as one he did not know, presumably he would have known the screams of women he did know.
He also doesn't say whether he saw the woman at the time. It's a peculiar statement.

The only peculiar statement here is that people know the screams of women they know.

@tigger wrote:
I do indeed not believe in the accident on the night and sudden discovery and incredibly fast worked plan, whether it started at 9.30 or 10.00 pm, they had about 70 minutes or 40 minutes before the police was contacted. After that all bets were off for how soon would the police arrive? Could be anywhere from 5 to 20 minutes. The latter being the case.
Salcedas also talks about having joked with DW about them all leaving her alone. Iirc the tennis coach gave the same account of having joked about this with DW.

None of this invalidates the theory that Maddy died on the evening of May 3rd and that her body was disposed of in a panic.  None of it even suggests that it isn't a probable sequence of events.

@tigger wrote:
If you can explain the ready-to-go photographs on the night to start of with - factor in the Smiths sighting and fit in  ALL the witness statements from that evening I'd be very interested.

I have lots of 'ready-to-go' photographs of my children with me at all times, but I'm not planning to have either of them disappear.  Ready-to-go photographs prove nothing, and suggest nothing.

I agree with the theory that the Smith sighting was Gerry McCann, and that this is possible because the alarm was raised much earlier than 10pm, as indicated by several witness statements.

I'm referring to the coloboma which she didn't have and therefore had to be photoshopped into both photographs.
So Gerry marched into PdL to dump his daughter's body whilst behind him a major search had started and was going on all night - he still found a way to 'lose' the body.
But it was retrievable and later transported in the Renault.
The following morning they were kept busy and spent a good deal of the day at the police station, they were continually in the company of other people, so could hardly collect a body.
Dogs were active as from 02.00 hours. Not CSI dogs but most dogs will react to such odours, certainly when fresh. S and R dogs were on the job by 11.00 pm on the 4th.
It's highly unlikely that they wouldn't have reacted to unusual scents. They did in fact react at apartment 5J and found rotting meat. Good dogs.

eta: as for specifics - above is a small sample, this has been discussed several times and may I say with somewhat more polite members. In any case you are not mentioning any specifics yourself apart from 'as indicated by several witness statements.'
So if you would take the trouble to use the search facility you'll find in-depth discussion on this topic and imo little or nothing to back up your theory (which I really thought came from Suep)

I will bow out of this 'discussion' - good luck with your next one.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 26
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by bobbin on 06.02.14 10:55

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@tigger wrote:
He did identify the woman as one he did not know, presumably he would have known the screams of women he did know.
He also doesn't say whether he saw the woman at the time. It's a peculiar statement.

The only peculiar statement here is that people know the screams of women they know.

@tigger wrote:
I do indeed not believe in the accident on the night and sudden discovery and incredibly fast worked plan, whether it started at 9.30 or 10.00 pm, they had about 70 minutes or 40 minutes before the police was contacted. After that all bets were off for how soon would the police arrive? Could be anywhere from 5 to 20 minutes. The latter being the case.
Salcedas also talks about having joked with DW about them all leaving her alone. Iirc the tennis coach gave the same account of having joked about this with DW.

None of this invalidates the theory that Maddy died on the evening of May 3rd and that her body was disposed of in a panic.  None of it even suggests that it isn't a probable sequence of events.

@tigger wrote:
If you can explain the ready-to-go photographs on the night to start of with - factor in the Smiths sighting and fit in  ALL the witness statements from that evening I'd be very interested.

I have lots of 'ready-to-go' photographs of my children with me at all times, but I'm not planning to have either of them disappear.  Ready-to-go photographs prove nothing, and suggest nothing.

I agree with the theory that the Smith sighting was Gerry McCann, and that this is possible because the alarm was raised much earlier than 10pm, as indicated by several witness statements.

If you can invalidate this theory please do so with specifics, and I'll be happy to address each point.
Do you have 'ready to go' iconic photos of your children, somewhat younger than they are now, with a 'coloboma', photo-shopped in.
I'll be interested to know your take on 'photo-shopped' photos ready to go.

bobbin

Posts : 2030
Reputation : 125
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 06.02.14 11:01

@tigger wrote:
I'm referring to the coloboma which she didn't have and therefore had to be photoshopped into both photographs.

Your interpretation only. Prove that she didn't have a coloboma. Prove that photographs have been photoshopped. I've read all the threads on photoshopping, which I notice you normally play a dominant role. None of them are convincing to me, and none of them prove anything.

@tigger wrote:
So Gerry marched into PdL to dump his daughter's body whilst behind him a major search had started and was going on all night - he still found a way to 'lose' the body.

It would seem so. How does this invalidate my theory or make yours more likely?

@tigger wrote:
But it was retrievable and later transported in the Renault.

Again, it would seem so, but how does this invalidate my theory or make yours more likely?

@tigger wrote:
The following morning they were kept busy and spent a good deal of the day at the police station, they were continually in the company of other people, so could hardly collect a body.
Dogs were active as from 02.00 hours. Not CSI dogs but most dogs will react to such odours, certainly when fresh. S and R dogs were on the job by 11.00 pm on the 4th.
It's highly unlikely that they wouldn't have reacted to unusual scents. They did in fact react at apartment 5J and found rotting meat. Good dogs.

You can use the words 'highly unlikely', but those dogs were not cadaver dogs. They certainly didn't react to the places that Eddie did. That just says to me that they're not trained to be cadaver dogs like Eddie was.

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 06.02.14 11:04

@bobbin wrote:
Do you have 'ready to go' iconic photos of your children, somewhat younger than they are now, with a 'coloboma', photo-shopped in.
I'll be interested to know your take on 'photo-shopped' photos ready to go.

Prove photo-shopping, because as of yet nobody on this forum has.

Yes, I have photographs of my children a lot younger than they are now, at this very moment.

Define 'iconic'. To me my photographs of my children are 'iconic', because I'm so familiar with them. To you they would just be photographs of children you don't know.

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 06.02.14 11:06

I apologise for responding to the subject of photo-shopping. Seems that it gets raised in many threads that have nothing to do with photo-shopping, and then 50 pages later the newbies get accused of disruption and derailing threads. For the record, please remember that I wasn't the one to bring up photo-shopping - that was tigger and bobbin.

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 06.02.14 11:13

@tigger

You mentioned the length of time they waited before calling the police.  My question to you is - if the stage was set, and everything had been set up earlier, why did they wait for so long?  Why didn't they immediately call the police when the 'alarm' was raised, when not doing so would inevitably raise very large suspicions?

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by bobbin on 06.02.14 12:56

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@bobbin wrote:
Do you have 'ready to go' iconic photos of your children, somewhat younger than they are now, with a 'coloboma', photo-shopped in.
I'll be interested to know your take on 'photo-shopped' photos ready to go.

Prove photo-shopping, because as of yet nobody on this forum has.  

Yes, I have photographs of my children a lot younger than they are now, at this very moment.

Define 'iconic'.  To me my photographs of my children are 'iconic', because I'm so familiar with them.  To you they would just be photographs of children you don't know.

This forum does not need to 'prove' photo-shopping.
Gerry and Kate McCann have done a perfectly good job of doing that themselves.
Educate yourself on what a 'Coloboma' is.
It is 'congenital' i.e. formed during the gestation period, it's as physically unchanging as if a leg/limb didn't form, and it DOES NOT CHANGE POSITION, as I have said before, a leg does not suddenly become an arm at some stage during a child's life, nor does this misplaced leg/arm suddenly go back to being a leg.

There is a photo of Madeleine as a baby....NO coloboma.
There are photos of Madeleine WITH distinct colobomas.
Some are at 7.30 o'clock, some are at 6.30 o'clock.

Gerry McCann made a 'good marketing ploy' out of the so called Coloboma.
Kate said, it was NOT really a coloboma, they never made much of it, it was just a little fleck which you would have to look closely to see.

Don't waste your time, or the forum members' time, by going and spitting in the wind, trying to get me to 'prove', or the 'forum' for that matter, that the coloboma, as marketed and seen in photos, and billboards etc. is a BIG LIE.

The parents have done that, and if you read back on this subject you will see this to be the case.

Spend your time on productive research that may bring JUSTICE to a little GIRL and stop trying to defend something already ADMITTED as untruth, by the PARENTS themselves, or attacking posters for highlighting what the parents have done to shoot themselves in the foot.

Sticking to your stance of defending those who have exposed themselves would look to me like the stance of an apologist, of which you have suggested others might be.

I hope my directness will be seen as an effort to pull this respectable forum's research back onto areas that will find justice for Maddie, and not distract or detract from that aim.

bobbin

Posts : 2030
Reputation : 125
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 06.02.14 13:01

In an attempt to defuse the photo-shop bomb, can we just agree that there are people who believe that many - if not all - of the Madeleine McCann photographs (and even old photographs of Kate as a child) have been digitally manipulated, and that I do not agree with this view.  In absence of any evidence of 'photo-shopping', I'm assuming that there is no 'photo-shopping'.

Several people believe there is, lots of it.  I don't.  If anyone wants to take the discussion further, I'm happy to do that in the 'Last Photo' thread.

This I will say.  If a theory claims this:

- That the McCanns had 'ready-to-go' photographs of Madeleine.
- That those photographs had been manipulated to include a coloboma.

then this must also be true:

- The disappearance of Madeleine McCann was pre-meditated, and planned before the family even left for Portugal..
- Photographs of Madeleine McCann were digitally manipulated to add a coloboma before the family even left for Portugal.
- Either Madeleine was planned to be taken on holiday and murdered, or her death occurred while contriving her disappearance.

This is far-fetched in the extreme.  My reasons:

'Emotionless' Kate's apparent grief in the days immediately following the disappearance - you can say it was an act, my judgement is that is was genuine.  If I accept Kate's immediate feelings of grief, than I cannot accept that she knew what was coming.  The pre-meditation can of course still work in this case, as long as Kate is not in on the plan.  And if Kate was not in on it, I find it amazing that she didn't tell all to the police when Madeleine died.  Kate must have been involved in some way, in my opinion. I wasn't convinced by the tears of Tracie Andrews for one second. Kate's grief did convince me, and still does.

The idea of adding a coloboma to all photographs of Madeleine - who came up with this one?  It's an incredibly poor idea.  All it takes is one photograph held by someone else not under your control that clearly shows no coloboma, and then your entire story is blown.  You'll be going to prison.  And no photograph without a coloboma has appeared - and yes, I've seen all the 'evidence' on this forum to the contrary.  It's not evidence of any kind, just bad interpretations.

They added the coloboma prior to leaving the UK so that they could later on have a marketing campaign centred around it?  Really?  If this is true, that person should get the Nobel Prize for Wacky Ideas.  They actually thought of giving her a distinguishing mark that they could use in their marketing campaigns after they'd murdered or just got rid of her?

Some people quote Kate's "it was only a fleck" comment as evidence.  Strange that people are prepared to believe that Kate McCann has told the truth if it supports their particular theory, but disbelieve everything else she's said.  I can explain the comment.  The McCanns would clearly have been coached for that interview, and told what to say and what not to say.  By Clarence Mitchell, of that I'm certain.  And one question he would have wanted to avoid was "Wouldn't using the coloboma in your campaign endanger Madeleine?"  So Mitchell would surely have coached them to say, "we didn't make much of it - it was only a fleck," if the question of the coloboma arose.

I know what Sherlock Holmes said about the impossible and the improbable.  But the theory that Maddy died on 3rd May is not impossible, and has not been eliminated.

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 06.02.14 13:05

@bobbin wrote:
This forum does not need to 'prove' photo-shopping.
Gerry and Kate McCann have done a perfectly good job of doing that themselves.
Educate yourself on what a 'Coloboma' is.
It is 'congenital' i.e. formed during the gestation period, it's as physically unchanging as if a leg/limb didn't form, and it DOES NOT CHANGE POSITION, as I have said before, a leg does not suddenly become an arm at some stage during a child's life, nor does this misplaced leg/arm suddenly go back to being a leg.

There is a photo of Madeleine as a baby....NO coloboma.
There are photos of Madeleine WITH distinct colobomas.
Some are at 7.30 o'clock, some are at 6.30 o'clock.

Gerry McCann made a 'good marketing ploy' out of the so called Coloboma.
Kate said, it was NOT really a coloboma, they never made much of it, it was just a little fleck which you would have to look closely to see.

Don't waste your time, or the forum members' time, by going and spitting in the wind, trying to get me to 'prove', or the 'forum' for that matter, that the coloboma, as marketed and seen in photos, and billboards etc. is a BIG LIE.

The parents have done that, and if you read back on this subject you will see this to be the case.

Spend your time on productive research that may bring JUSTICE to a little GIRL and stop trying to defend something already ADMITTED as untruth, by the PARENTS themselves, or attacking posters for highlighting what the parents have done to shoot themselves in the foot.

Sticking to your stance of defending those who have exposed themselves would look to me like the stance of an apologist, of which you have suggested others might be.

I hope my directness will be seen as an effort to pull this respectable forum's research back onto areas that will find justice for Maddie, and not distract or detract from that aim.

Expect an official complaint from me for all the accusations you have unjustly made.

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by bobbin on 06.02.14 13:13

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@bobbin wrote:
This forum does not need to 'prove' photo-shopping.
Gerry and Kate McCann have done a perfectly good job of doing that themselves.
Educate yourself on what a 'Coloboma' is.
It is 'congenital' i.e. formed during the gestation period, it's as physically unchanging as if a leg/limb didn't form, and it DOES NOT CHANGE POSITION, as I have said before, a leg does not suddenly become an arm at some stage during a child's life, nor does this misplaced leg/arm suddenly go back to being a leg.

There is a photo of Madeleine as a baby....NO coloboma.
There are photos of Madeleine WITH distinct colobomas.
Some are at 7.30 o'clock, some are at 6.30 o'clock.

Gerry McCann made a 'good marketing ploy' out of the so called Coloboma.
Kate said, it was NOT really a coloboma, they never made much of it, it was just a little fleck which you would have to look closely to see.

Don't waste your time, or the forum members' time, by going and spitting in the wind, trying to get me to 'prove', or the 'forum' for that matter, that the coloboma, as marketed and seen in photos, and billboards etc. is a BIG LIE.

The parents have done that, and if you read back on this subject you will see this to be the case.

Spend your time on productive research that may bring JUSTICE to a little GIRL and stop trying to defend something already ADMITTED as untruth, by the PARENTS themselves, or attacking posters for highlighting what the parents have done to shoot themselves in the foot.

Sticking to your stance of defending those who have exposed themselves would look to me like the stance of an apologist, of which you have suggested others might be.

I hope my directness will be seen as an effort to pull this respectable forum's research back onto areas that will find justice for Maddie, and not distract or detract from that aim.

Except an official complaint from me for all the accusations you have unjustly made.
Do you mean 'accept' or did you in fact mean 'except'.

bobbin

Posts : 2030
Reputation : 125
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 06.02.14 13:17

@bobbin wrote:
Do you mean 'accept' or did you in fact mean 'except'.

Neither, I meant 'Expect'. My apologies, but your numerous personal attacks shook me so much I unfortunately made a typo.

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by Guest on 06.02.14 13:18

Firstly this is turning into a photo shop thread. Secondly, everyone has their own opinions and should be allowed to voice them. Please can we have a bit of calm and discuss reasonably.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by aquila on 06.02.14 13:19

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:In an attempt to defuse the photo-shop bomb, can we just agree that there are people who believe that many - if not all - of the Madeleine McCann photographs (and even old photographs of Kate as a child) have been digitally manipulated, and that I do not agree with this view.  In absence of any evidence of 'photo-shopping', I'm assuming that there is no 'photo-shopping'.

Several people believe there is, lots of it.  I don't.  If anyone wants to take the discussion further, I'm happy to do that in the 'Last Photo' thread.

This I will say.  If a theory claims this:

- That the McCanns had 'ready-to-go' photographs of Madeleine.
- That those photographs had been added to include a coloboma.

then this must also be true:

- The disappearance of Madeleine McCann was pre-meditated, and planned before the family even left for Portugal..
- Photographs of Madeleine McCann were digitally manipulated to add a coloboma before the family even left for Portugal.
- Either Madeleine was planned to be taken on holiday and murdered, or her death occurred while contriving her disappearance.

This is far-fetched in the extreme.  My reasons:

'Emotionless' Kate's apparent grief in the days immediately following the disappearance - you can say it was an act, my judgement is that is was genuine.  If I accept Kate's immediate feelings of grief, than I cannot accept that she knew what was coming.  The pre-meditation can of course still work in this case, as long as Kate is not in on the plan.  And if Kate was not in on it, I find it amazing that she didn't tell all to the police when Madeleine died.  Kate must have been involved in some way, in my opinion. I wasn't convinced by the tears of Tracie Andrews for one second. Kate's grief did convince me, and still does.

The idea of adding a coloboma to all photographs of Madeleine - who came up with this one?  It's an incredibly poor idea.  All it takes is one photograph held by someone else not under your control that clearly shows no coloboma, and then your entire story is blown.  You'll be going to prison.  And no photograph without a coloboma has appeared - and yes, I've seen all the 'evidence' on this forum to the contrary.  It's not evidence of any kind, just bad interpretations.

They added the coloboma prior to leaving the UK so that they could later on have a marketing campaign centred around it?  Really?  If this is true, that person should get the Nobel Prize for Wacky Ideas.  They actually thought of giving her a distinguishing mark that they could use in their marketing campaigns after they'd murdered or just got rid of her?

Some people quote Kate's "it was only a fleck" comment as evidence.  Strange that people are prepared to believe that Kate McCann has told the truth if it supports their particular theory, but disbelieve everything else she's said.  I can explain the comment.  The McCanns would clearly have been coached for that interview, and told what to say and what not to say.  By Clarence Mitchell, of that I'm certain.  And one question he would have wanted to avoid was "Wouldn't using the coloboma in your campaign endanger Madeleine?"  So Mitchell would surely have coached them to say, "we didn't make much of it - it was only a fleck," if the question of the coloboma arose.

I know what Sherlock Holmes said about the impossible and the improbable.  But the theory that Maddy died on 3rd May is not impossible, and has not been eliminated.

Doesn't that rather depend on your own perception of grief?

It was only a few days after Madeleine's disappearance that Kate was jogging. It wasn't long after Madeleine's disappearance (days) that Gerry and Kate were smiling outside the Church in PDL. It wasn't long after Madeleine's disappearance that Gerry was photographed laughing and smiling on the balcony of his 'paid-for' apartment.

Are the McCanns the only people on the planet who show grief in a 'different way'?

Take a look at the innocent parents of children who have gone missing. I doubt very much you'll see anything like the traits Kate McCann showed in her 'grief'. That's probably because the McCanns behaviour has never been anything like 'normal'.

aquila

Posts : 7957
Reputation : 1182
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 06.02.14 13:21

@aquila wrote:
Doesn't that rather depend on your own perception of grief?

It was only a few days after Madeleine's disappearance that Kate was jogging. It wasn't long after Madeleine's disappearance (days) that Gerry and Kate were smiling outside the Church in PDL. It wasn't long after Madeleine's disappearance that Gerry was photographed laughing and smiling on the balcony of his 'paid-for' apartment.

Are the McCanns the only people on the planet who show grief in a 'different way'?

Take a look at the innocent parents of children who have gone missing. I doubt very much you'll see anything like the traits Kate McCann showed in her 'grief'. That's probably because the McCanns behaviour has never been anything like 'normal'.

Aye aquila, that's why I stated that it was my judgement :)

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by aquila on 06.02.14 13:29

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@aquila wrote:
Doesn't that rather depend on your own perception of grief?

It was only a few days after Madeleine's disappearance that Kate was jogging. It wasn't long after Madeleine's disappearance (days) that Gerry and Kate were smiling outside the Church in PDL. It wasn't long after Madeleine's disappearance that Gerry was photographed laughing and smiling on the balcony of his 'paid-for' apartment.

Are the McCanns the only people on the planet who show grief in a 'different way'?

Take a look at the innocent parents of children who have gone missing. I doubt very much you'll see anything like the traits Kate McCann showed in her 'grief'. That's probably because the McCanns behaviour has never been anything like 'normal'.

Aye aquila, that's why I stated that it was my judgement :)
Clarence would be proud of your support for a couple of parents who displayed absolutely no normal signs of grief and held themselves together at every public moment.

The McCanns are heroes!

aquila

Posts : 7957
Reputation : 1182
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 06.02.14 13:32

@aquila wrote:
Clarence would be proud of your support for a couple of parents who displayed absolutely no normal signs of grief and held themselves together at every public moment.

The McCanns are heroes!

Not in my book, they should both be behind bars in my opinion, and the pink one too :)

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by Guest on 06.02.14 14:03

A reminder of Uncle John's behaviour only six days after his niece was supposedly abducted by paedophiles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eow5XijukmU

I wonder how he reacts to good news when even bad news fills him with such glee.

Very weird family.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by diatribe on 06.02.14 14:28

@aquila wrote:





Clarence would be proud of your support for a couple of parents who displayed absolutely no normal signs of grief and held themselves together at every public moment.

The McCanns are heroes!
Taking aside the irony,  the McCanns must be up there with the all time greats of unconvincing liars . I've never reigned on forums for long, mainly because I don't suffer fools gladly and have a tendancy to dissect the lies of the pretentious and self made internet millionaires who flourish on the aforementioned.

However, I have to state that despite the enormity of the lies and ignorance I have experienced from various internet fora combatants, I have never found anything or anyone quite in the same league as the McCanns. It isn't the efforts of professional liars such as Mitchell, or for that matter the ability of libel lawyers to gag others that have saved the McCanns, it is the inability to find their daughter's body that has been their saviour.

Since this incident occurred in 2007, there has probably only been one accurate tabloid headline which I believe emanated from the Express back in the early days and it was on the lines of, 'Find the body or these two will escape.'

diatribe

Posts : 602
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-15
Location : London

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by Guest on 06.02.14 14:30

@diatribe wrote:
@aquila wrote:





Clarence would be proud of your support for a couple of parents who displayed absolutely no normal signs of grief and held themselves together at every public moment.

The McCanns are heroes!
Taking aside the irony,  the McCanns must be up there with the all time greats of unconvincing liars . I've never reigned on forums for long, mainly because I don't suffer fools gladly and have a tendancy to dissect the lies of the pretentious and self made internet millionaires who flourish on the aforementioned.

However, I have to state that despite the enormity of the lies and ignorance I have experienced from various internet fora combatants, I have never found anything or anyone quite in the same league as the McCanns. It isn't the efforts of professional liars such as Mitchell, or for that matter the ability of libel lawyers to gag others that have saved the McCanns, it is the inability to find their daughter's body that has been their saviour.

Since this incident occurred in 2007, there has probably only been one accurate tabloid headline which I believe emanated from the Express back in the early days and it was on the lines of, 'Find the body or these two will escape.'

I'm afraid I have never seen anything like that headline (along the lines of) you quote there diatribe.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by tigger on 06.02.14 14:43


____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 26
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: help needed

Post by diatribe on 06.02.14 15:29

candyfloss wrote:
I'm afraid I have never seen anything like that headline (along the lines of) you quote there diatribe.

I stand to be corrected, Candyfloss, but I tend to remember seeing the page flashed up on an Al Jazeera video take on the western meeja's coverage of the McCanns. It may not even have been the 'Express' as it was a fleeting glimpse describing how the meeja had turned against them, presumably after they became belated suspects.

However, I can't be positive, hence my initial inclusion of 'I believe,' because I don't and haven't read any newspapers for yrs. not even the broadsheets.

NB. Apparently my eyes didn't deceive me and it was the Express. Madeleine. 'Find body or the McCanns will escape' 'Prosecutor's ultimatum to Portugese police.'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6JV6sP9UC4

The reference point is 13 mins. 37 secs. into the video.

diatribe

Posts : 602
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-15
Location : London

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