Sunday Express 9 Feb 2014 - MADELEINE - There REALLY WAS a COVER-UP

Well, 1. the death occurred.  2. The request fro help and support was made. 3. The story of neglect / abduction was created.  So I dont agree.  When help from higher establishments was requested, the story of neglect and abduction had not yet been invented. The assistance required was likely requested by someone a lot more 'important' than the dear Mc Canns. Someone who had no part in M's death but a lot to hide in terms of reputation. 'Please Aunty, please help me or your dear nephew might be caught with his pants down... get your dear colleagues to help me OR Else - I will spill the beans about them ...please help me ' 
Aunty says " Get out of there you stupid fool, leave first thing tomorrow... I'll sort the rest out.'

When help from higher establishments was requested, the story of neglect and abduction had not yet been invented
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I beg to differ.

The McCanns were screaming down the phones to relatives in UK within the hour screaming 'ABDUCTION'

Jon Corner, a close friend of Mrs McCann and godparent of the twins, said Kate telephoned him in the middle of the night distraught.
He said: "She just blurted out that Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

He continued: "She was in an absolutely hysterical state - very, very distressed. She blurted out Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

"Kate said the shutters* of the room were smashed. Madeleine was missing

"She just told me that Maddy had been ABDUCTED, that the shutters* of the apartment had been forced and someone had taken her."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A friend said: "Kate rang us totally hysterical, saying Maddy WAS ABDUCTED. They're devastated."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The appalling news that three-year-old Maddy McCann was feared kidnapped from her holiday flat came in a distraught phone call early yesterday from her dad. (GM)

Heart specialist Gerry McCann rang his sister Trish in Scotland after Maddy vanished from her cot placed between two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie.

Trish revealed yesterday: "He was breaking his heart, saying Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted"

Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters* were jemmied open.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Close family friend Gill Renwick, of Liverpool, "Madeleine has obviously been taken. She couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters* were forced."

* Perfectly INTACT shutters without a 'mark' on them!

When help from higher establishments was requested, the story of neglect and abduction had not yet been invented.
Pt 2.

we read DP Rogatory:

First on 'scene' (GNR) about 10:50pm 3rd May 2007.

"there was two Policemen who err arrived who I believe were from the GNR, err you know it felt you know quite some time before they got there, err we were trying to convey that SHE'S BEEN ABDUCTED and we, we got a computer err printer, we'd got a picture of Madeleine so that it could be distributed as quickly as possible. (But NOT the very 'last photo' by pool, even though it was in KM's camera, that holidaymakers might have 'recognised' but a cutesy one 6 months 'out of date') We were trying to impress the importance to the, to the err two Policemen err that you know that SHE'D BEEN ABDUCTED"

.....because you know we just didn't feel that we could get this message across to err to anybody that she HAD BEEN ABDUCTED"
------------------------------------------------------------------

So DP was trying his unconvincing best, to convey, get the message across, to the Police, JUST 50 minutes after 'discovery of missing Madeleine' that she HAD been 'abducted'

The GNR, PJ and resort manager didn't believe him..............poor lamb.

j.rob wrote:

Ladyinred wrote:For what it is worth, whether Madeleine was 'abducted', 'stolen' or 'snatched from her bed' seems to revolve around semantics more than anything else. The key question is whether this was the act of a total stranger and they had no prior knowledge of it or involvement in it. 

The McCanns appear to  be convinced that she did not 'wander off' or just mysteriously disappear. On this point, at least, I think we should believe them. 'They have taken her' cried Madeleine's mother. 'She is gone'. Again, I think that is true - someone or some people had indeed taken Madeleine out of the apartment, whether that evening or previously, we do not know.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


j.rob: please explain why we should believe anything the McCanns say.

I am also convinced that MBM did not wander off.  IMO the parents are responsible for her 'mysterious' disappearance, i.e. her death.

You accept the parent's assertion that Madeleine was taken on 3rd May, or previously.  Why do you believe this?

I think you perhaps slightly misunderstand what I was trying to get at. Perhaps I was too obtuse. What I wanted to convey is that when Kate McCann cried: 'she has gone.....someone has taken her' and words to that effect then I do believe that was the truth. However, it wasn't a random stranger, it was someone she knew or someone that the McCanns knew or had instructed to take her.

 I do not believe the McCanns - on the contrary, I think they have sent the world and his wife on a crazy witch-hunt and I think that the Portugese police spotted what was going on from the very beginning.

HOWEVER - I think that, although the McCann's overall premise is a lie, they quite often say things that indicate what may have really happened. For instance: 'someone has taken her. she has gone'.

Yes - Kate knew that Madeleine had been taken by somebody and that she had not just wandered off. Yes, I too believe that the McCanns are behind her disappearance, and they know (mostly) what happened to her. But if other people were involved in her disappearance (at the behest of the McCanns) then the McCanns  may not 100% know what happened. The criminal underworld is probably not full of people who are going to necessarily do what they say they will do.

My opinion is that you have to look at what the McCanns say from the perspective that they are lying. However, when people tell lies, they quite often betray themselves by slipping in - between the lies - the truth.

So, for instance - the McCAnns claim Madeleine and the twins were drugged. Yes - I think that might well be the truth. But not by a mystery random person, but by either them or someone they knew. There are several reasons they would have brought this up even though, ironically, it could implicate them. Firstly, it would explain for the twins sleeping so deeply. Secondly, it would explain how a stranger was able to take Madeleine out of her bed without her protesting and thirdly, in the event that the twins were medically examined, it would lead credence to their version of events and get them off the hook (assuming, as I do, that the drugging of their children was done either by them or by their friends/aquaintances).

There are many other examples of the McCanns revealing what probably really happened, but through their lies. You see this all the time in criminal cases. In the case of the McCAnns whatever happened to Madeleine - her 'abduction' her being drugged - was always someone else's fault. But, really, they incriminated themselves from the very beginning by coming up with all these explanation when, in reality, if they really DIDN'T KNOW (because they really didn't know and weren't there to witness it) then they really didn't know.

The Portuguese police would have spotted all these inconsistencies from the word go. None of what they were saying added up. It must have been obvious that they were all trying way too hard to pin their daughter's disappearance on a random abductor. Why try to shoehorn a mystery disappearance into a very specific scenario (eg: abduction into a paedophile ring?)

And all the above is especially mad when you consider that the McCann, prior to the apparently mystery abduction, had never considered that to be a risk factor. ......that being the case, why would they come to that conclusion the moment they found their daughter 'missing'.

The fact that the McCanns themselves constantly bring up the subject of paedophilia and Kate writes about it in her book also raises a few red flags with me. Why harp on about it? Kate herself once said that 'people with dirty thoughts have dirty minds'.

Again - if the McCanns had not brought it up, I would not be suspicious about it. 

In my opinion the McCanns have at lest narcissistic tendencies and maybe psychopathic tendencies. It is as though they are playing a game with everyone. Hinting at the truth, but through their lies. Gerry constantly goading reporters and others. The closer they get to the truth, the more the McCanns and their team attack back. They cannot, will not, accept their culpability instead preferring to pin the blame on everyone else.

Thanks, j.rob. I did understand what you said, perhaps my reply was unclear.

So you believe that Madeleine was taken by someone on 3rd and that Kate's cries of her being taken are genuine?  I don't.

jeanmonroe wrote:When help from higher establishments was requested, the story of neglect and abduction had not yet been invented.
Pt 2.

we read DP Rogatory:

First on 'scene' (GNR) about 10:50pm 3rd May 2007.

"there was two Policemen who err arrived who I believe were from the GNR, err you know it felt you know quite some time before they got there, err we were trying to convey that SHE'S BEEN ABDUCTED and we, we got a computer err printer, we'd got a picture of Madeleine so that it could be distributed as quickly as possible. (But NOT the very 'last photo' by pool, even though it was in KM's camera, that holidaymakers might have 'recognised' but a cutesy one 6 months 'out of date') We were trying to impress the importance to the, to the err two Policemen err that you know that SHE'D BEEN ABDUCTED"

.....because you know we just didn't feel that we could get this message across to err to anybody that she HAD BEEN ABDUCTED"
------------------------------------------------------------------

So DP was trying his unconvincing best, to convey, get the message across, to the Police, JUST 50 minutes after 'discovery of missing Madeleine' that she HAD been 'abducted'

The GNR, PJ and resort manager didn't believe him..............poor lamb.

I watched a documentary about Jeremy Bamber a few months ago, and what struck me what his insistence when the police arrived that his sister had killed the family.

The McCanns stuck rigidly to the abduction line from the moment Madeleine's disappearance was reported, and in fact ensured it was established when the first news broke. It was quite a feat persuading the world an abduction had taken place, especially given the rarity of stranger abduction.

Cristobell wrote:

jeanmonroe wrote:When help from higher establishments was requested, the story of neglect and abduction had not yet been invented.
Pt 2.

we read DP Rogatory:

First on 'scene' (GNR) about 10:50pm 3rd May 2007.

"there was two Policemen who err arrived who I believe were from the GNR, err you know it felt you know quite some time before they got there, err we were trying to convey that SHE'S BEEN ABDUCTED and we, we got a computer err printer, we'd got a picture of Madeleine so that it could be distributed as quickly as possible. (But NOT the very 'last photo' by pool, even though it was in KM's camera, that holidaymakers might have 'recognised' but a cutesy one 6 months 'out of date') We were trying to impress the importance to the, to the err two Policemen err that you know that SHE'D BEEN ABDUCTED"

.....because you know we just didn't feel that we could get this message across to err to anybody that she HAD BEEN ABDUCTED"
------------------------------------------------------------------

So DP was trying his unconvincing best, to convey, get the message across, to the Police, JUST 50 minutes after 'discovery of missing Madeleine' that she HAD been 'abducted'

The GNR, PJ and resort manager didn't believe him..............poor lamb.

I watched a documentary about Jeremy Bamber a few months ago, and what struck me what his insistence when the police arrived that his sister had killed the family.  

The McCanns stuck rigidly to the abduction line from the moment Madeleine's disappearance was reported, and in fact ensured it was established when the first news broke.  It was quite a feat persuading the world an abduction had taken place, especially given the rarity of stranger abduction.

There lies the key. I remember the headline news of the day and with my friends and colleagues the only comment made was "what ******* rubbish parents". This is fact moderators not IMO. As the weeks went on the only thing that came across to me and colleagues was "whatever the truth may be it is not what that creepy couple are saying".
That is the situation today, I never followed the case until a few years ago when I was made aware of something Kate McC had said and from that moment on it was a case of NO WAY.
     

jeanmonroe wrote:When help from higher establishments was requested, the story of neglect and abduction had not yet been invented
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I beg to differ.

The McCanns were screaming down the phones to relatives in UK within the hour screaming 'ABDUCTION'

Jon Corner, a close friend of Mrs McCann and godparent of the twins, said Kate telephoned him in the middle of the night distraught.
He said: "She just blurted out that Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

He continued: "She was in an absolutely hysterical state - very, very distressed. She blurted out Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

"Kate said the shutters* of the room were smashed. Madeleine was missing

"She just told me that Maddy had been ABDUCTED, that the shutters* of the apartment had been forced and someone had taken her."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A friend said: "Kate rang us totally hysterical, saying Maddy WAS ABDUCTED. They're devastated."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The appalling news that three-year-old Maddy McCann was feared kidnapped from her holiday flat came in a distraught phone call early yesterday from her dad. (GM)

Heart specialist Gerry McCann rang his sister Trish in Scotland after Maddy vanished from her cot placed between two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie.

Trish revealed yesterday: "He was breaking his heart, saying Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted"

Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters* were jemmied open.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Close family friend Gill Renwick, of Liverpool, "Madeleine has obviously been taken. She couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters* were forced."

* Perfectly INTACT shutters without a 'mark' on them!

Yes we clearly disagree on this important point.

When they were busy crying 'abduction'  help had already been sought, IMO.  That was the agreed storyline - one of abduction.

Ladyinred wrote:

j.rob wrote:

Ladyinred wrote:For what it is worth, whether Madeleine was 'abducted', 'stolen' or 'snatched from her bed' seems to revolve around semantics more than anything else. The key question is whether this was the act of a total stranger and they had no prior knowledge of it or involvement in it. 

The McCanns appear to  be convinced that she did not 'wander off' or just mysteriously disappear. On this point, at least, I think we should believe them. 'They have taken her' cried Madeleine's mother. 'She is gone'. Again, I think that is true - someone or some people had indeed taken Madeleine out of the apartment, whether that evening or previously, we do not know.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


j.rob: please explain why we should believe anything the McCanns say.

I am also convinced that MBM did not wander off.  IMO the parents are responsible for her 'mysterious' disappearance, i.e. her death.

You accept the parent's assertion that Madeleine was taken on 3rd May, or previously.  Why do you believe this?

I think you perhaps slightly misunderstand what I was trying to get at. Perhaps I was too obtuse. What I wanted to convey is that when Kate McCann cried: 'she has gone.....someone has taken her' and words to that effect then I do believe that was the truth. However, it wasn't a random stranger, it was someone she knew or someone that the McCanns knew or had instructed to take her.

 I do not believe the McCanns - on the contrary, I think they have sent the world and his wife on a crazy witch-hunt and I think that the Portugese police spotted what was going on from the very beginning.

HOWEVER - I think that, although the McCann's overall premise is a lie, they quite often say things that indicate what may have really happened. For instance: 'someone has taken her. she has gone'.

Yes - Kate knew that Madeleine had been taken by somebody and that she had not just wandered off. Yes, I too believe that the McCanns are behind her disappearance, and they know (mostly) what happened to her. But if other people were involved in her disappearance (at the behest of the McCanns) then the McCanns  may not 100% know what happened. The criminal underworld is probably not full of people who are going to necessarily do what they say they will do.

My opinion is that you have to look at what the McCanns say from the perspective that they are lying. However, when people tell lies, they quite often betray themselves by slipping in - between the lies - the truth.

So, for instance - the McCAnns claim Madeleine and the twins were drugged. Yes - I think that might well be the truth. But not by a mystery random person, but by either them or someone they knew. There are several reasons they would have brought this up even though, ironically, it could implicate them. Firstly, it would explain for the twins sleeping so deeply. Secondly, it would explain how a stranger was able to take Madeleine out of her bed without her protesting and thirdly, in the event that the twins were medically examined, it would lead credence to their version of events and get them off the hook (assuming, as I do, that the drugging of their children was done either by them or by their friends/aquaintances).

There are many other examples of the McCanns revealing what probably really happened, but through their lies. You see this all the time in criminal cases. In the case of the McCAnns whatever happened to Madeleine - her 'abduction' her being drugged - was always someone else's fault. But, really, they incriminated themselves from the very beginning by coming up with all these explanation when, in reality, if they really DIDN'T KNOW (because they really didn't know and weren't there to witness it) then they really didn't know.

The Portuguese police would have spotted all these inconsistencies from the word go. None of what they were saying added up. It must have been obvious that they were all trying way too hard to pin their daughter's disappearance on a random abductor. Why try to shoehorn a mystery disappearance into a very specific scenario (eg: abduction into a paedophile ring?)

And all the above is especially mad when you consider that the McCann, prior to the apparently mystery abduction, had never considered that to be a risk factor. ......that being the case, why would they come to that conclusion the moment they found their daughter 'missing'.

The fact that the McCanns themselves constantly bring up the subject of paedophilia and Kate writes about it in her book also raises a few red flags with me. Why harp on about it? Kate herself once said that 'people with dirty thoughts have dirty minds'.

Again - if the McCanns had not brought it up, I would not be suspicious about it. 

In my opinion the McCanns have at lest narcissistic tendencies and maybe psychopathic tendencies. It is as though they are playing a game with everyone. Hinting at the truth, but through their lies. Gerry constantly goading reporters and others. The closer they get to the truth, the more the McCanns and their team attack back. They cannot, will not, accept their culpability instead preferring to pin the blame on everyone else.

Thanks, j.rob. I did understand what you said, perhaps my reply was unclear.

So you believe that Madeleine was taken by someone on 3rd and that Kate's cries of her being taken are genuine?  I don't.

It seems that Kate called 'abduction ' too quickly - she had not been informed that GM had still not had time to sort out the shutters.
GM had had to walk around with a child in order that some witnesses could view a potential abductor. He also had to carry MBM from the aprtament to her first hiding place.

When Kate shouted abduction it was all part of the plan but she raised the alarm too quickly - pat of the plan that went wrong.

HelenMeg wrote:

Ladyinred wrote:

j.rob wrote:

Ladyinred wrote:For what it is worth, whether Madeleine was 'abducted', 'stolen' or 'snatched from her bed' seems to revolve around semantics more than anything else. The key question is whether this was the act of a total stranger and they had no prior knowledge of it or involvement in it. 

The McCanns appear to  be convinced that she did not 'wander off' or just mysteriously disappear. On this point, at least, I think we should believe them. 'They have taken her' cried Madeleine's mother. 'She is gone'. Again, I think that is true - someone or some people had indeed taken Madeleine out of the apartment, whether that evening or previously, we do not know.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


j.rob: please explain why we should believe anything the McCanns say.

I am also convinced that MBM did not wander off.  IMO the parents are responsible for her 'mysterious' disappearance, i.e. her death.

You accept the parent's assertion that Madeleine was taken on 3rd May, or previously.  Why do you believe this?

I think you perhaps slightly misunderstand what I was trying to get at. Perhaps I was too obtuse. What I wanted to convey is that when Kate McCann cried: 'she has gone.....someone has taken her' and words to that effect then I do believe that was the truth. However, it wasn't a random stranger, it was someone she knew or someone that the McCanns knew or had instructed to take her.

 I do not believe the McCanns - on the contrary, I think they have sent the world and his wife on a crazy witch-hunt and I think that the Portugese police spotted what was going on from the very beginning.

HOWEVER - I think that, although the McCann's overall premise is a lie, they quite often say things that indicate what may have really happened. For instance: 'someone has taken her. she has gone'.

Yes - Kate knew that Madeleine had been taken by somebody and that she had not just wandered off. Yes, I too believe that the McCanns are behind her disappearance, and they know (mostly) what happened to her. But if other people were involved in her disappearance (at the behest of the McCanns) then the McCanns  may not 100% know what happened. The criminal underworld is probably not full of people who are going to necessarily do what they say they will do.

My opinion is that you have to look at what the McCanns say from the perspective that they are lying. However, when people tell lies, they quite often betray themselves by slipping in - between the lies - the truth.

So, for instance - the McCAnns claim Madeleine and the twins were drugged. Yes - I think that might well be the truth. But not by a mystery random person, but by either them or someone they knew. There are several reasons they would have brought this up even though, ironically, it could implicate them. Firstly, it would explain for the twins sleeping so deeply. Secondly, it would explain how a stranger was able to take Madeleine out of her bed without her protesting and thirdly, in the event that the twins were medically examined, it would lead credence to their version of events and get them off the hook (assuming, as I do, that the drugging of their children was done either by them or by their friends/aquaintances).

There are many other examples of the McCanns revealing what probably really happened, but through their lies. You see this all the time in criminal cases. In the case of the McCAnns whatever happened to Madeleine - her 'abduction' her being drugged - was always someone else's fault. But, really, they incriminated themselves from the very beginning by coming up with all these explanation when, in reality, if they really DIDN'T KNOW (because they really didn't know and weren't there to witness it) then they really didn't know.

The Portuguese police would have spotted all these inconsistencies from the word go. None of what they were saying added up. It must have been obvious that they were all trying way too hard to pin their daughter's disappearance on a random abductor. Why try to shoehorn a mystery disappearance into a very specific scenario (eg: abduction into a paedophile ring?)

And all the above is especially mad when you consider that the McCann, prior to the apparently mystery abduction, had never considered that to be a risk factor. ......that being the case, why would they come to that conclusion the moment they found their daughter 'missing'.

The fact that the McCanns themselves constantly bring up the subject of paedophilia and Kate writes about it in her book also raises a few red flags with me. Why harp on about it? Kate herself once said that 'people with dirty thoughts have dirty minds'.

Again - if the McCanns had not brought it up, I would not be suspicious about it. 

In my opinion the McCanns have at lest narcissistic tendencies and maybe psychopathic tendencies. It is as though they are playing a game with everyone. Hinting at the truth, but through their lies. Gerry constantly goading reporters and others. The closer they get to the truth, the more the McCanns and their team attack back. They cannot, will not, accept their culpability instead preferring to pin the blame on everyone else.

Thanks, j.rob. I did understand what you said, perhaps my reply was unclear.

So you believe that Madeleine was taken by someone on 3rd and that Kate's cries of her being taken are genuine?  I don't.

It seems that Kate called 'abduction ' too quickly - she had not been informed that GM had still not had time to sort out the shutters.
GM had had to walk around with a child in order that some witnesses could view a potential abductor. He also had to carry MBM from the aprtament to her first hiding place.

When Kate shouted abduction it was all part of the plan but she raised the alarm too quickly - pat of the plan that went wrong.

Because Gerry had bumped into JW.

J Rob: My opinion is that you have to look at what the McCanns say from the perspective that they are lying. However, when people tell lies, they quite often betray themselves by slipping in - between the lies - the truth.

Yes I agree totally, if you analyse what they say and understand that they are lying - then you can glean some truth.
Whatever they say tends to be for a reason, to make us believe something that they need us to believe. Often it is inserted between
bits of truth.  Its quite interesting really to solve a mystery on this basis.
When Kate id raise the alarm, imo it is possible that M had been removed by GM from the apartment and it had taken her by surprise. I believe that
in the first instance imo G removed the body to a nearby house for initial storage whilst the alarm was raised that the girl had been abducted. Its possible K went back to the apartment expecting to be able to say goodbye to M but the body had already been removed which would have made her feel quite distraught.

jeanmonroe wrote:When help from higher establishments was requested, the story of neglect and abduction had not yet been invented
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I beg to differ.

The McCanns were screaming down the phones to relatives in UK within the hour screaming 'ABDUCTION'

Jon Corner, a close friend of Mrs McCann and godparent of the twins, said Kate telephoned him in the middle of the night distraught.
He said: "She just blurted out that Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

He continued: "She was in an absolutely hysterical state - very, very distressed. She blurted out Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

"Kate said the shutters* of the room were smashed. Madeleine was missing

"She just told me that Maddy had been ABDUCTED, that the shutters* of the apartment had been forced and someone had taken her."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A friend said: "Kate rang us totally hysterical, saying Maddy WAS ABDUCTED. They're devastated."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The appalling news that three-year-old Maddy McCann was feared kidnapped from her holiday flat came in a distraught phone call early yesterday from her dad. (GM)

Heart specialist Gerry McCann rang his sister Trish in Scotland after Maddy vanished from her cot placed between two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie.

Trish revealed yesterday: "He was breaking his heart, saying Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted"

Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters* were jemmied open.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Close family friend Gill Renwick, of Liverpool, "Madeleine has obviously been taken. She couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters* were forced."

* Perfectly INTACT shutters without a 'mark' on them!

The dramatic melodrama that the McCanns enacted from the very moment that Kate 'discovered' that Madeleine was missing makes me suspect that it was more than 'just' an accident (although that is still seriously neglectful, when you consider that the parents had left the children unattended.) They just went to such great lengths to turn it all into the abduction of the century - there must have been more behind it than covering up an accident.

jeanmonroe wrote:When help from higher establishments was requested, the story of neglect and abduction had not yet been invented
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I beg to differ.

The McCanns were screaming down the phones to relatives in UK within the hour screaming 'ABDUCTION'

Jon Corner, a close friend of Mrs McCann and godparent of the twins, said Kate telephoned him in the middle of the night distraught.
He said: "She just blurted out that Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

He continued: "She was in an absolutely hysterical state - very, very distressed. She blurted out Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

"Kate said the shutters* of the room were smashed. Madeleine was missing

"She just told me that Maddy had been ABDUCTED, that the shutters* of the apartment had been forced and someone had taken her."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A friend said: "Kate rang us totally hysterical, saying Maddy WAS ABDUCTED. They're devastated."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The appalling news that three-year-old Maddy McCann was feared kidnapped from her holiday flat came in a distraught phone call early yesterday from her dad. (GM)

Heart specialist Gerry McCann rang his sister Trish in Scotland after Maddy vanished from her cot placed between two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie.

Trish revealed yesterday: "He was breaking his heart, saying Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted"

Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters* were jemmied open.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Close family friend Gill Renwick, of Liverpool, "Madeleine has obviously been taken. She couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters* were forced."

* Perfectly INTACT shutters without a 'mark' on them!

The dramatic melodrama that the McCanns enacted from the very moment that Kate 'discovered' that Madeleine was missing makes me suspect that it was more than 'just' an accident (although that is still seriously neglectful, when you consider that the parents had left the children unattended.) They just went to such great lengths to turn it all into the abduction of the century - there must have been more behind it than covering up an accident.

j.rob wrote:

jeanmonroe wrote:When help from higher establishments was requested, the story of neglect and abduction had not yet been invented
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I beg to differ.

The McCanns were screaming down the phones to relatives in UK within the hour screaming 'ABDUCTION'

Jon Corner, a close friend of Mrs McCann and godparent of the twins, said Kate telephoned him in the middle of the night distraught.
He said: "She just blurted out that Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

He continued: "She was in an absolutely hysterical state - very, very distressed. She blurted out Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

"Kate said the shutters* of the room were smashed. Madeleine was missing

"She just told me that Maddy had been ABDUCTED, that the shutters* of the apartment had been forced and someone had taken her."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A friend said: "Kate rang us totally hysterical, saying Maddy WAS ABDUCTED. They're devastated."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The appalling news that three-year-old Maddy McCann was feared kidnapped from her holiday flat came in a distraught phone call early yesterday from her dad. (GM)

Heart specialist Gerry McCann rang his sister Trish in Scotland after Maddy vanished from her cot placed between two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie.

Trish revealed yesterday: "He was breaking his heart, saying Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted"

Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters* were jemmied open.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Close family friend Gill Renwick, of Liverpool, "Madeleine has obviously been taken. She couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters* were forced."

* Perfectly INTACT shutters without a 'mark' on them!

The dramatic melodrama that the McCanns enacted from the very moment that Kate 'discovered' that Madeleine was missing makes me suspect that it was more than 'just' an accident (although that is still seriously neglectful, when you consider that the parents had left the children unattended.) They just went to such great lengths to turn it all into the abduction of the century - there must have been more behind it than covering up an accident.

Something I, and I am sure many others are reluctant to think about Rob, but you have a point. In the event of an accident, they would have been grief stricken and blamed themselves, the grief would have been very real, as it is too many tragic cases. That is, it would have been tangible, it would have touched those of us who might have been naturally cynical, but the grief simply wasn't there. There is a very brief video of Gerry giggling and making faces - standing at his patio doors, I believe, that is positively chilling. It was taken within days of Madeleine going missing.

I am starting to think something that I have avoided this past 7 years, because I can think of no explanation for the parents to have been so upbeat following an [avoidable] trauma, that would have torn most families to shreds. Especially if it involved an accident that could so easily have been prevented. The decision to leave the children alone was so monumentally stupid, any normal couple would have been at each other's throats. I hate to think the worst, but am reaching a stage where I have to reassess.

Ladyinred wrote:

j.rob wrote:

Ladyinred wrote:For what it is worth, whether Madeleine was 'abducted', 'stolen' or 'snatched from her bed' seems to revolve around semantics more than anything else. The key question is whether this was the act of a total stranger and they had no prior knowledge of it or involvement in it. 

The McCanns appear to  be convinced that she did not 'wander off' or just mysteriously disappear. On this point, at least, I think we should believe them. 'They have taken her' cried Madeleine's mother. 'She is gone'. Again, I think that is true - someone or some people had indeed taken Madeleine out of the apartment, whether that evening or previously, we do not know.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


j.rob: please explain why we should believe anything the McCanns say.

I am also convinced that MBM did not wander off.  IMO the parents are responsible for her 'mysterious' disappearance, i.e. her death.

You accept the parent's assertion that Madeleine was taken on 3rd May, or previously.  Why do you believe this?

I think you perhaps slightly misunderstand what I was trying to get at. Perhaps I was too obtuse. What I wanted to convey is that when Kate McCann cried: 'she has gone.....someone has taken her' and words to that effect then I do believe that was the truth. However, it wasn't a random stranger, it was someone she knew or someone that the McCanns knew or had instructed to take her.

 I do not believe the McCanns - on the contrary, I think they have sent the world and his wife on a crazy witch-hunt and I think that the Portugese police spotted what was going on from the very beginning.

HOWEVER - I think that, although the McCann's overall premise is a lie, they quite often say things that indicate what may have really happened. For instance: 'someone has taken her. she has gone'.

Yes - Kate knew that Madeleine had been taken by somebody and that she had not just wandered off. Yes, I too believe that the McCanns are behind her disappearance, and they know (mostly) what happened to her. But if other people were involved in her disappearance (at the behest of the McCanns) then the McCanns  may not 100% know what happened. The criminal underworld is probably not full of people who are going to necessarily do what they say they will do.

My opinion is that you have to look at what the McCanns say from the perspective that they are lying. However, when people tell lies, they quite often betray themselves by slipping in - between the lies - the truth.

So, for instance - the McCAnns claim Madeleine and the twins were drugged. Yes - I think that might well be the truth. But not by a mystery random person, but by either them or someone they knew. There are several reasons they would have brought this up even though, ironically, it could implicate them. Firstly, it would explain for the twins sleeping so deeply. Secondly, it would explain how a stranger was able to take Madeleine out of her bed without her protesting and thirdly, in the event that the twins were medically examined, it would lead credence to their version of events and get them off the hook (assuming, as I do, that the drugging of their children was done either by them or by their friends/aquaintances).

There are many other examples of the McCanns revealing what probably really happened, but through their lies. You see this all the time in criminal cases. In the case of the McCAnns whatever happened to Madeleine - her 'abduction' her being drugged - was always someone else's fault. But, really, they incriminated themselves from the very beginning by coming up with all these explanation when, in reality, if they really DIDN'T KNOW (because they really didn't know and weren't there to witness it) then they really didn't know.

The Portuguese police would have spotted all these inconsistencies from the word go. None of what they were saying added up. It must have been obvious that they were all trying way too hard to pin their daughter's disappearance on a random abductor. Why try to shoehorn a mystery disappearance into a very specific scenario (eg: abduction into a paedophile ring?)

And all the above is especially mad when you consider that the McCann, prior to the apparently mystery abduction, had never considered that to be a risk factor. ......that being the case, why would they come to that conclusion the moment they found their daughter 'missing'.

The fact that the McCanns themselves constantly bring up the subject of paedophilia and Kate writes about it in her book also raises a few red flags with me. Why harp on about it? Kate herself once said that 'people with dirty thoughts have dirty minds'.

Again - if the McCanns had not brought it up, I would not be suspicious about it. 

In my opinion the McCanns have at lest narcissistic tendencies and maybe psychopathic tendencies. It is as though they are playing a game with everyone. Hinting at the truth, but through their lies. Gerry constantly goading reporters and others. The closer they get to the truth, the more the McCanns and their team attack back. They cannot, will not, accept their culpability instead preferring to pin the blame on everyone else.

Thanks, j.rob. I did understand what you said, perhaps my reply was unclear.

So you believe that Madeleine was taken by someone on 3rd and that Kate's cries of her being taken are genuine?  I don't.

No. The McCanns responses were staged. Apart from anything, as others have written about at length, it takes time to process emotions. To respond in that manner within a few minutes of 'discovering' that your child is missing is inauthentic.

I think something happened to Madeleine quite early on in the holiday. It seems as though the last (credible?) sighting of her was on Sunday, the day after they arrived at the resort.  Kate is at great pains, in her book, to describe the apparently happy, carefree days they all spent at the resort in the lead-up to Madeleine's 'abduction'. Sadly, I think this is all fabrication.

It is possible something happened the night that Mrs Fenn heard crying from the apartment for an hour and a quarter. In any event, whatever had happened, the McCann's had rehearsed their procedure for the night of Madeleine's 'abduction'. Their friends appeared to be behind them, with the checking stories and the quickly drawn up 'timeline'. 

Kate's reaction was faked - but I think it is true that Madeleine may well have been removed ('taken') from the apartment that evening. The McCanns were behind what happened but it doesn't mean they necessarily physically removed Madeleine or her body. Maybe the chaos that ensued, before the police arrived, provided a cover for a person to scuttle away, perhaps, carrying Madeleine. Logically you ask why she wasn't taken away in a car but perhaps it was all part of their cunning plan - to suggest that road-block etc should be set up when all along she was being held somewhere nearby.

HelenMeg wrote:

Ladyinred wrote:

j.rob wrote:

Ladyinred wrote:For what it is worth, whether Madeleine was 'abducted', 'stolen' or 'snatched from her bed' seems to revolve around semantics more than anything else. The key question is whether this was the act of a total stranger and they had no prior knowledge of it or involvement in it. 

The McCanns appear to  be convinced that she did not 'wander off' or just mysteriously disappear. On this point, at least, I think we should believe them. 'They have taken her' cried Madeleine's mother. 'She is gone'. Again, I think that is true - someone or some people had indeed taken Madeleine out of the apartment, whether that evening or previously, we do not know.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


j.rob: please explain why we should believe anything the McCanns say.

I am also convinced that MBM did not wander off.  IMO the parents are responsible for her 'mysterious' disappearance, i.e. her death.

You accept the parent's assertion that Madeleine was taken on 3rd May, or previously.  Why do you believe this?

I think you perhaps slightly misunderstand what I was trying to get at. Perhaps I was too obtuse. What I wanted to convey is that when Kate McCann cried: 'she has gone.....someone has taken her' and words to that effect then I do believe that was the truth. However, it wasn't a random stranger, it was someone she knew or someone that the McCanns knew or had instructed to take her.

 I do not believe the McCanns - on the contrary, I think they have sent the world and his wife on a crazy witch-hunt and I think that the Portugese police spotted what was going on from the very beginning.

HOWEVER - I think that, although the McCann's overall premise is a lie, they quite often say things that indicate what may have really happened. For instance: 'someone has taken her. she has gone'.

Yes - Kate knew that Madeleine had been taken by somebody and that she had not just wandered off. Yes, I too believe that the McCanns are behind her disappearance, and they know (mostly) what happened to her. But if other people were involved in her disappearance (at the behest of the McCanns) then the McCanns  may not 100% know what happened. The criminal underworld is probably not full of people who are going to necessarily do what they say they will do.

My opinion is that you have to look at what the McCanns say from the perspective that they are lying. However, when people tell lies, they quite often betray themselves by slipping in - between the lies - the truth.

So, for instance - the McCAnns claim Madeleine and the twins were drugged. Yes - I think that might well be the truth. But not by a mystery random person, but by either them or someone they knew. There are several reasons they would have brought this up even though, ironically, it could implicate them. Firstly, it would explain for the twins sleeping so deeply. Secondly, it would explain how a stranger was able to take Madeleine out of her bed without her protesting and thirdly, in the event that the twins were medically examined, it would lead credence to their version of events and get them off the hook (assuming, as I do, that the drugging of their children was done either by them or by their friends/aquaintances).

There are many other examples of the McCanns revealing what probably really happened, but through their lies. You see this all the time in criminal cases. In the case of the McCAnns whatever happened to Madeleine - her 'abduction' her being drugged - was always someone else's fault. But, really, they incriminated themselves from the very beginning by coming up with all these explanation when, in reality, if they really DIDN'T KNOW (because they really didn't know and weren't there to witness it) then they really didn't know.

The Portuguese police would have spotted all these inconsistencies from the word go. None of what they were saying added up. It must have been obvious that they were all trying way too hard to pin their daughter's disappearance on a random abductor. Why try to shoehorn a mystery disappearance into a very specific scenario (eg: abduction into a paedophile ring?)

And all the above is especially mad when you consider that the McCann, prior to the apparently mystery abduction, had never considered that to be a risk factor. ......that being the case, why would they come to that conclusion the moment they found their daughter 'missing'.

The fact that the McCanns themselves constantly bring up the subject of paedophilia and Kate writes about it in her book also raises a few red flags with me. Why harp on about it? Kate herself once said that 'people with dirty thoughts have dirty minds'.

Again - if the McCanns had not brought it up, I would not be suspicious about it. 

In my opinion the McCanns have at lest narcissistic tendencies and maybe psychopathic tendencies. It is as though they are playing a game with everyone. Hinting at the truth, but through their lies. Gerry constantly goading reporters and others. The closer they get to the truth, the more the McCanns and their team attack back. They cannot, will not, accept their culpability instead preferring to pin the blame on everyone else.

Thanks, j.rob. I did understand what you said, perhaps my reply was unclear.

So you believe that Madeleine was taken by someone on 3rd and that Kate's cries of her being taken are genuine?  I don't.

It seems that Kate called 'abduction ' too quickly - she had not been informed that GM had still not had time to sort out the shutters.
GM had had to walk around with a child in order that some witnesses could view a potential abductor. He also had to carry MBM from the aprtament to her first hiding place.

When Kate shouted abduction it was all part of the plan but she raised the alarm too quickly - pat of the plan that went wrong.

Yes - that makes sense if you look at the witness statements from staff at the Ocean Club resort. There are several witnesses who were in the area who stated that they heard a commotion and the news that a child had gone missing as early as 9.20pm and certainly well before 10pm which is the time that Kate writes in her book. So what happened? Was Jeremy who was wheeling his child around in a buggy in the way? The witness who reported hearing about a commotion at around 9.20pm also states that at a time before 10pm, the table was empty apart from an elderly lady. This version of events does not fit in with the version of events given by the McCanns and their friends.

Perhaps, as suggested, the plan was thwarted by one or more pesky witnesses (such as Jeremy). The 'jemmied' shutters is an interesting inconsistency. Perhaps Gerry had been planning on planting 'evidence' of a break-in (as was reported by McCann family members despite their being no evidence) but a witness - Jeremy - appeared at the crucial time.

In the meantime, the 'abduction' story had already been leaked. Which makes the Oldfield check at 9.30pm and Kate's 'discovery'  at 10pm as fanciful as the phantom random abductor. 

It is still extraordinary how they managed to get their friends to rally round with what appears to be such a fanciful story. Which is what makes me think that at least some of the friends may have thought what happened to Madeleine was a tragic accident (overdose/fall etc). However I do believe that at least one of their friends (David Payne for instance) knew about a bigger agenda.

Cristobell wrote:

j.rob wrote:

jeanmonroe wrote:When help from higher establishments was requested, the story of neglect and abduction had not yet been invented
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I beg to differ.

The McCanns were screaming down the phones to relatives in UK within the hour screaming 'ABDUCTION'

Jon Corner, a close friend of Mrs McCann and godparent of the twins, said Kate telephoned him in the middle of the night distraught.
He said: "She just blurted out that Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

He continued: "She was in an absolutely hysterical state - very, very distressed. She blurted out Madeleine had been ABDUCTED.

"Kate said the shutters* of the room were smashed. Madeleine was missing

"She just told me that Maddy had been ABDUCTED, that the shutters* of the apartment had been forced and someone had taken her."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A friend said: "Kate rang us totally hysterical, saying Maddy WAS ABDUCTED. They're devastated."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The appalling news that three-year-old Maddy McCann was feared kidnapped from her holiday flat came in a distraught phone call early yesterday from her dad. (GM)

Heart specialist Gerry McCann rang his sister Trish in Scotland after Maddy vanished from her cot placed between two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie.

Trish revealed yesterday: "He was breaking his heart, saying Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted"

Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters* were jemmied open.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Close family friend Gill Renwick, of Liverpool, "Madeleine has obviously been taken. She couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters* were forced."

* Perfectly INTACT shutters without a 'mark' on them!

The dramatic melodrama that the McCanns enacted from the very moment that Kate 'discovered' that Madeleine was missing makes me suspect that it was more than 'just' an accident (although that is still seriously neglectful, when you consider that the parents had left the children unattended.) They just went to such great lengths to turn it all into the abduction of the century - there must have been more behind it than covering up an accident.

Something I, and I am sure many others are reluctant to think about Rob, but you have a point.  In the event of an accident, they would have been grief stricken and blamed themselves, the grief would have been very real, as it is too many tragic cases.  That is, it would have been tangible, it would have touched those of us who might have been naturally cynical, but the grief simply wasn't there.  There is a very brief video of Gerry giggling and making faces - standing at his patio doors, I believe, that is positively chilling.  It was taken within days of Madeleine going missing.  

I am starting to think something that I have avoided this past 7 years, because I can think of no explanation for the parents to have been so upbeat following an [avoidable] trauma, that would have torn most families to shreds.  Especially if it involved an accident that could so easily have been prevented.  The decision to leave the children alone was so monumentally stupid, any normal couple would have been at each other's throats.  I hate to think the worst, but am reaching a stage where I have to reassess.  

Hi Cristobell,
Absolutely no disrespect, however I was a little surprised at your post.
To avoid thinking about something for 7 years because it is unpleasant or abhorant to us is not doing justice to Madeleine.
We have to look at all possibilities and follow all the evidence wherever it takes us even if we don't like where it leads.
But I do agree that many scenarios and theories are developed just because of this avoidance.
The majority of good people find it hard to grasp that true evil really does exist.

The shutters have always been a key player in the McCann drama.  As is so often the case with the McCanns, Kate provides helpful pointers as to the mind-set of the evil mystery 'abductor' and his or her cunning ploys (Page 131, Madeleine). 

'Perhaps he'd either come in or gone out via the window, not both; perhaps he hadn't been through it at all but had opened it to prepare an emergency escape route if needed, or merely to throw investigators off the scent. He could have been in and out of the apartment more than once between our visits.'

Gosh! There is a thought. The person or people responsible for Madeleine's appearance may have wanted to throw investigators off the scent! Well I never.

But that is not all: 'What we do now believe is that the abductor had very probably been into the room before Gerry's check.'
You mean the 9.15pm check?  The one where Gerry admired the sleeping Madeleine and thought to himself that 'she's so beautiful'.

Such as shame that Kate didn't do the 9.30pm check and instead Matt just listened at the door, which he hadn't adjusted. (Poor old Matt - what are the odds on him booking another family holiday with the McCanns?!)

'It may have helped if I had made the nine-thirty visit instead of Matt,' writes Kate, with an extraordinary lack of conviction. 'I would have noticed that the door was not how we'd left it .....and raised the alarm sooner'.

What a shame! Although it is odd that neither Kate or Gerry called the police themselves on their mobiles that evening. 

Leaving aside that curiosity, there is the added complication that some eye-witnesses report that the alarm had already been raised by 9.30pm - and certainly before 10pm.

In any event, at least Kate is not troubled by her conscience with regards to not checking on Madeleine herself during the hour time-slot which allegedly tragically gave the nasty abductor a golden opportunity to steal Madeleine from her bed. 

As she writes in her book: 'I know it's nobody's fault that I didn't .'<check on Madeleine.> (Page 131)

The sheer brazenness and f***wittery encompassed in this Orwellian statement could almost take your breath away. It is Kate McCann at her best, or perhaps that should be worst.Whose fault could it be apart from yours, Kate, that you elected not to check on your children? 

Then the penny drops - of course, Kate is subtly suggesting that Matt somehow has some culpability, as he offered to check but did not actually look in the apartment, allowing the abductor to do his worst. But, having hinted at this, she then graciously lets Matt off the hook 'it's nobody's fault'. You see, Kate is just such a sweetie! She could have blamed Matt for not going in the apartment, or even Jane, for not telling her about Tannerman. But no. She will not incriminate her friends! Or even herself! t's all the fault of the bogey-man.....(well, and Amaral....and anyone who doesn't believe the McCann version of events and....)

And of course this nonsensical 'nobodies' fault statement leads on to the 'piece de resistance': 

'I know nobody could have forseen how it could possibly matter.' <that I didn't check on Madeleine myself>  'It might not have made the slightest of difference in any case. But it might.'

Unscrambling the double-think, and wrapping your head around Kate's brazen audacity, what we are left with is this, as far as I can decipher.

Kate is telling us that she thinks  it is possible that the abductor may have been in the room when Gerry did his check at 9.05pm, waiting for him to leave. (She also says they both believe the abductor had very probably been into the room before Gerry's check.

This being the case, it is so unlucky that on this particular evening at a very crucial time, Kate just so happened not to check inside the apartment herself. If she had done she might have raised the alarm sooner.

Such a shame she couldn't be there as it allowed the nasty random abductor a clear period of practically an hour to hover in and around the apartment, ready and waiting to steal Madeleine from her bed. Probably also allowing him to drug her and the twins too.

'So may chance incidents and minor decisions made in innocence, which on their own would not have driven events to such a disastrous conclusion. Together, though, they seem to have accumulated into a monstrous mountain of bad luck.' 

You couldn't make it up, could you? Or could you?

Poor old Kate, just SO unlucky. All those random incidents and unimportant decisions - just little details that at the time seemed so completely innocent and innocuous. Ready to shatter the very fabric of their happy little family holiday in this Algarve paradise. All of them conspired to give the golden ticket to the random mystery abductor who seized his opportunity and - Woosh - In he swooped and out went Madeleine.

SUCH BAD LUCK!

j.rob wrote:
SUCH BAD LUCK!

Especially for Madeleine. Who doesn't seem to have rated in Kate's little muse upon luckery. Only bad luck for herself and Gerry. Madeleine is curiously absent from it all.

I am starting to think something that I have avoided this past 7 years, because I can think of no explanation for the parents to have been so upbeat following an [avoidable] trauma, that would have torn most families to shreds.  Especially if it involved an accident that could so easily have been prevented.  The decision to leave the children alone was so monumentally stupid, any normal couple would have been at each other's throats.  I hate to think the worst, but am reaching a stage where I have to reassess.  [/quote]
Hi Cristobell,
Absolutely no disrespect, however I was a little surprised at your post.
To avoid thinking about something for 7 years because it is unpleasant or abhorant to us is not doing justice to Madeleine.
We have to look at all possibilities and follow all the evidence wherever it takes us even if we don't like where it leads.
But I do agree that many scenarios and theories are developed just because of this avoidance.
The majority of good people find it hard to grasp that true evil really does exist.[/quote]


I agree it does seem odd, no disrespect taken    .

I have tried to study this case from a logical, non emotive perspective, I fear that if I allow emotion to become involved it may cloud the issues. If I imagine the actual mechanics involved in carrying out the crime I believe was committed, I start to see the parents as monsters and I don't want to do that. Working on the theory of an accident, does help to avoid the harsh reality. I can't say that my noble principles have worked, God help me, I find the pair of them despicable.

Despite that, I do fear for them when the truth comes out. That which is avoided in polite society will lend itself rather well to blood curdling, sensational headlines. I even wonder if that might be the reason the newspapers are overselling the abduction story, how will the public react when the truth is known?

You are right that the majority of people find it hard to grasp that evil exists. I have spent a lifetime trying to discover what it is that makes people evil, its probably what has drawn me to study this case so closely. I have also leaned towards this case being a tragic accident, maybe because that was what I wanted to believe, but the parents lack of grief now makes me question that.

Just a thought. I wonder if it was someone else's job to jemmy the shutters from the outside...and they bailed on Gerry and didn't do it. And didn't bother telling Gerry that they'd bailed. Then we get Gerry insisting that the shutters were jemmied and Kate ranting on about the window being open - according to the script they'd drawn up. Except that one little piece of the jigsaw puzzle hadn't been done.

So who might have been tasked with the job? One of the Tapas group who were doing their "checks"?

If it was one of them, it could be a kind of fail-safe detail for them. Their silence in return for Gerry's silence regarding their involvement?

Just an opinion.

j.rob wrote:Such as shame that Kate didn't do the 9.30pm check and instead Matt just listened at the door, which he hadn't adjusted. (Poor old Matt - what are the odds on him booking another family holiday with the McCanns?!)
SUCH BAD LUCK

What do you mean by "listened at the door" and "hadn't adjusted"? Not at all clear!

Okeydokey wrote:

j.rob wrote:Such as shame that Kate didn't do the 9.30pm check and instead Matt just listened at the door, which he hadn't adjusted. (Poor old Matt - what are the odds on him booking another family holiday with the McCanns?!)
SUCH BAD LUCK

What do you mean by "listened at the door" and "hadn't adjusted"? Not at all clear!

I think jrob meant that Kate said she should have gone to look instead of Matt because he "only listened at the door and did not move the door to peek inside ". The door being more open than G or K left it was what alerted Kate on her !0' O Clock shift , although how she remembered it, is anybody's guess???

It's bollocks anyway so it doesn't really matter, but Gerry supposedly last person to enter the room on his solo 'just before 9.05 by his watch' (which he didn't/did have?) & therefore open & then half shut the door to the precisely measured position so that Kate would be aware at 10.00 that it 'was open quite wide, not how we had left it'. (why would it have been?)
'At first I assumed that Matt must have moved it. I walked over and gently began to pull it to.' so she wasn't intending to bother to check the kids properly either.
Then we had the slamming, whooshing etc etc.
(Quotes from bewk p. 70)

THE BAD LUCK JUST KEPT ON COMING!

Doug D wrote:It's bollocks anyway so it doesn't really matter, but Gerry supposedly last person to enter the room on his solo 'just before 9.05 by his watch' (which he didn't/did have?) & therefore open & then half shut the door to the precisely measured position so that Kate would be aware at 10.00 that it 'was open quite wide, not how we had left it'. (why would it have been?)
'At first I assumed that Matt must have moved it. I walked over and gently began to pull it to.' so she wasn't intending to bother to check the kids properly either.
Then we had the slamming, whooshing etc etc.
(Quotes from bewk p. 70)

THE BAD LUCK JUST KEPT ON COMING!

But then the Good Luck kicked in and saw to it that no interviewer would have the balls to query all this crud. at first they got away with claiming the door was open more than they had left it but after a while, the comments on the fora probably got through to them, and they remembered that Matt had done the 9.30 check and they wondered if he had moved the door. WHAT!!
And then Kate said she probably wouldn't have bothered looking at the kids either if the door hadn't flung open and the curtains hadn't wooshed. None of the interviewers said "Hang on Kate, you went to check the kids but were almost NOT going to check them? What if one of them had fallen out of bed and was lying bleeding to death? "
They all of them are guilty of crawling up the McCanns' backsides, they should be ashamed.