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

Red Flags

Page 3 of 23 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 13 ... 23  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by lj on 06.03.14 9:01

A congenital eye defect that later on miraculously was not.

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

lj

Posts : 3280
Reputation : 153
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by Guest on 06.03.14 9:06

@Woofer wrote:
@Casey5 wrote:
@Okeydokey wrote:
@Casey5 wrote:Washing cuddle cat. Nobody with a missing child would have done that.

Not sure any of those are verified. Do you have sources for those?
Can only give sources for mine Okeydokey:-



From Kate's diary



http://www.mccannfiles.com/id166.html
 
THURSDAY, JULY 12: I hate the person who took my Madeleine—the same one who has caused all this trouble, who made us feel worthless and mistrustful and mainly who has frightened my beautiful Madeleine. I will never forgive that person/those people for this. Never.
 


I hope you don't mind Woofer but I've snipped the rest of your post because the paragraph from 12 July leapt out at me. There's just so much wrongness in that first sentence:

Why on earth would you feel worthless if your child was abducted? Angry - yes, but worthless? I cannot think of a single abduction scenario that would cause that emotion. However, I would feel worthless if I was responsible for my child's death.

And, of all the things an abductor could do, frightening my child would be at the bottom of the list of my worries.

Also, why does she need to emphasise Madeleine's beauty? All children are beautiful in the eyes of their parents but to me (and I fully expect God to smite me down for this blasphemy) Madeleine looks like your average, ordinary three/four year old.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by Guest on 06.03.14 9:17

The bruises on Kate are a huge red flag.
We can only see what is uncovered on her arms, there may have been more.
The explaination given does not fit in with the pattern of bruising.
The PJ did miss an opportunity to question her about these and photograph them.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Circumstantial Evidence

Post by PeterMac on 06.03.14 9:47

@Varriott wrote:In my opinion, these are all enormous red flags.  What I think it points to, however, is circumstantial evidence.  I personally think the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming.  But it's clearly not enough for a court conviction beyond reasonable doubt.  Not even enough for charges. . .  SNIP.

This is interesting.   Sorry about the length of what follows but it is important.
At Detective training school they pointed out very forcibly that most evidence in a murder case is circumstantial.
The victim cannot give direct evidence, and it is not common for the act to be witnessed directly by someone else.  (see Pretorius)
So the prosecution must start to add all the bits together to make a case.

This is from Wiki, which puts it rather well


Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime. By contrast, direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion directly—i.e., without need for any additional evidence or inference.
On its own, it is the nature of circumstantial evidence for more than one explanation to still be possible. Inference from one piece of circumstantial evidence may not guarantee accuracy. Circumstantial evidence usually accumulates into a collection, so that the pieces then become corroborating evidence. Together, they may more strongly support one particular inference over another. An explanation involving circumstantial evidence becomes more valid as proof of a fact when the alternative explanations have been ruled out.
Circumstantial evidence allows a trier of fact to deduce a fact exists. In criminal law, the inference is made by the trier of facts in order to support the truth of assertion (of guilt or absence of guilt).
Testimony can be direct evidence or it can be circumstantial. If the witness claims they saw the crime take place, this is considered direct evidence.
For instance, a witness saying that the defendant stabbed the victim is direct evidence. By contrast, a witness who says that she saw the defendant enter a house, that she heard screaming, and that she saw the defendant leave with a bloody knife gives circumstantial evidence. It is the necessity for inference, and not the obviousness of a conclusion, that determines whether or not evidence is circumstantial.
Forensic evidence supplied by an expert witness is usually circumstantial evidence. A forensic scientist who testifies that ballistics proves the defendant’s firearm killed the victim provides circumstantial evidence from which the defendant’s guilt can be inferred. (Note that an inference of guilt could be incorrect if the person who actually fired the weapon was somebody else.)
On the other hand, the additional circumstantial evidence of the defendant's fingerprint on the trigger would dovetail with this piece to provide corroborating evidence.
Circumstantial evidence is especially important in civil and criminal cases where direct evidence is lacking.

to spell it out.
You own a gun. -------- This is not proof that you shot and killed X
The bullet that killed X was fired from that gun  -------  This is not proof that you shot and killed X
Your fingerprints were found on the trigger of the gun   -------  This is not proof that you shot and killed X
You had an argument with X the night before    -------This is not proof that you shot and killed X
You told a friend that you were going to "sort him out"  -------  This is not proof that you shot and killed X
You were seen entering the house -------  This is not proof that you shot and killed X
The sound of a gunshot was heard by a witness  -------  This is not proof that you shot and killed X
You were seen to leave the house shortly afterwards -------   This is not proof that you shot and killed X
There is no evidence that anyone other than the two of you were in the house  -------  This is not proof that you shot and killed X
Your got on a plane to Portugal half an hour later -------  This is not proof that you shot and killed X
You briefed a leading extradition solicitor  -------  This is not proof that you shot and killed X
You refused to answer any questions  -------  This is not proof that you shot and killed X
Traces of powder discharge were found on your hands -------  This is not proof that you shot and killed X
You produced an alibi which proved to be 'ludicrous'  -------  This is not proof that you shot and killed X

every bit is "circumstantial - as to the murder, though "direct' as to the individual nugget of evidence
Guilty, or Not guilty ?

In their usual wordy way the courts have pronounced on this many times,
see for example
Lord Normand in Teper - v - R [1952] A.C. 480" '[Circumstantial evidence] must always be narrowly examined, if only because evidence of this kind may be fabrciated to cast suspicion on another...It is also necessary before drawing the inference of the accused's guilt from circumstantial evidence to be sure that there are no other co-existing circumstances which would weaken or destroy the inference'. Then it goes on: 'On the other hand, it has been said that circumstantial evidence is often the best evidence. It is evidence of surrounding circumstances which, by undesigned coincidence, is capable of proving a proposition with the accuracy of mathematics. It is no derogation of evidence to say that it is circumstantial' [R - v - Taylor, Weaver & Donovan, 21 Crim.App.R. 20, CCA].


Now let us re-read Taveres de Almeida's report of 10 September 2007.
Surely that might have been enough for a successful prosecution at least for (a) hiding a body (b) preventing an inquest and (c) perverting the course of justice.
Is there any longer any mystery as to why they fled two days after they were named as "arguidos" ?

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by canada12 on 06.03.14 10:24

And here's a link to that report by Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida...

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm

Where he concludes, after analyzing all the evidence gathered, that the child is dead and the parents were responsible for cadaver occultation, and the entire GROUP was lying since the first day of the investigation.

Fascinating reading. Thanks PeterMac.

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 193
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by PeterMac on 06.03.14 10:40

@canada12 wrote:And here's a link to that report by Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida...
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm
Where he concludes, after analyzing all the evidence gathered, that the child is dead and the parents were responsible for cadaver occultation, and the entire GROUP was lying since the first day of the investigation.

Fascinating reading. Thanks PeterMac.

And that quote should be 'bumped' on every thread, every day, put on Facebook, twitter and everywhere else.
And put in a form and with a heading so that it comes out top on a google search.
And with the important information that this is the conclusion of someone OTHER than Dr Amaral,
It was the view of the entire team, and of every investigating officer who has ever touched the case.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by jeanmonroe on 06.03.14 11:14

@canada12 wrote:And here's a link to that report by Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida...

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm

Where he concludes, after analyzing all the evidence gathered, that the child is dead and the parents were responsible for cadaver occultation, and the entire GROUP was lying since the first day of the investigation.

Fascinating reading. Thanks PeterMac.

WHY haven't the McCanns, or the entire GROUP, SUED this chap?

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5162
Reputation : 914
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by jeanmonroe on 06.03.14 11:20

ALWAYS WORTH MENTIONING.

From everything that was exposed from the AUTOS, we conclude that:
A) The minor Madeleine McCann died in the apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort, on the night of May 3rd of 2007;

B) It was performed a simulation of kidnapping;

C) In order to avoid the death [alarm] of the minor before 22H00, it was created a situation of the children's surveillance by the McCann while the children slept;

D) Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are involved in the occultation of the cadaver of their child Madeleine McCann;

E) At this moment, there seems that there aren't strong indicia that the death of the minor didn't happen due to a tragic accident;

F) From what was obtained until now, everything points out that the McCann, as self-defence, didn't want to deliver immediately and voluntarily the cadaver, existing a strong possibility that the same was transported from the initial place of deposition. This situation is susceptible to raise questions about the circumstances under which the death of the minor occurred.

So we suggest that the 'Autos' be sent to the EX.mo Sr. Procurador Geral da R'ublica [General Attorney], in order to:

G) New interrogation of the Arguidos Kate and Gerry McCann;
H) Evaluation of the measure of restraint to be applied in this case;

On the course of the house search to the residence of the McCann, a manuscript was found, a sort of diary, already photocopied, possibly authored by Kate McCann, and admitting that the same may contain elements that may help to reach the material truth of the facts, WE PROPOSE THAT:

I) The photocopies of such document to be presented to the M.Mo Judge regarding its apprehension, if legal, translation and eventual recovery of elements to bring into the 'Autos' for future investigation.


CONCLUSION

On the tenth of September, two thousand and seven

Chief Inspector

(Tavares de Almeida)

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5162
Reputation : 914
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by Woofer on 06.03.14 11:27

Poe wrote:
@Woofer wrote:
@Casey5 wrote:
@Okeydokey wrote:
@Casey5 wrote:Washing cuddle cat. Nobody with a missing child would have done that.

Not sure any of those are verified. Do you have sources for those?
Can only give sources for mine Okeydokey:-



From Kate's diary



http://www.mccannfiles.com/id166.html
 
THURSDAY, JULY 12: I hate the person who took my Madeleine—the same one who has caused all this trouble, who made us feel worthless and mistrustful and mainly who has frightened my beautiful Madeleine. I will never forgive that person/those people for this. Never.
 


I hope you don't mind Woofer but I've snipped the rest of your post because the paragraph from 12 July leapt out at me. There's just so much wrongness in that first sentence:

Why on earth would you feel worthless if your child was abducted? Angry - yes, but worthless? I cannot think of a single abduction scenario that would cause that emotion. However, I would feel worthless if I was responsible for my child's death.

And, of all the things an abductor could do, frightening my child would be at the bottom of the list of my worries.

Also, why does she need to emphasise Madeleine's beauty? All children are beautiful in the eyes of their parents but to me (and I fully expect God to smite me down for this blasphemy) Madeleine looks like your average, ordinary three/four year old.

Hello Poe - I think it was actually Casey5 that provided the link which I then quoted.  Yes, I thought those were odd things to write - you`d surely feel guilt if your child had been abducted, not worthlessness.  I wonder if this is a childhood script - the ingrained script received from parents. Taking a quote from Personality Adaptations by Vann Joines & Ian Stewart - "In narcissistic personality disorders the child develops into believing it is either wonderful or defective therefore the child adapts by always attempting to be wonderful but underneath the grandiose false-self facade is a terrified child who is afraid of ceasing to exist if he is not special and unique."   In times of crisis the adult would revert to script.

Yes, she is pre-occupied with the beauty of Madeleine but this, again, would fit with the narcissistic personality disorder.  One of the clues to NPD is "pre-occupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty and ideal love".

I thought is was weird writing that she hates the person who has taken her `and caused all this trouble` - eh !!!

____________________
The constant assertion of belief is an indication of fear - Jiddu Krishnamurti

Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by jeanmonroe on 06.03.14 11:39

G) New interrogation of the Arguidos Kate and Gerry McCann;
------------------------------------------------------------

As the Portuguese have now re-opened their investigation and it is a 'live' investigation can they (PJ) now apply to the authorities, the EX.mo Sr. Procurador Geral da R'ublica [General Attorney], to 'approve' a new interrogation of Kate and Gerry McCann?

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5162
Reputation : 914
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by PeterMac on 06.03.14 11:40

@jeanmonroe wrote:
@canada12 wrote:And here's a link to that report by Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida...
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm
Where he concludes, after analyzing all the evidence gathered, that the child is dead and the parents were responsible for cadaver occultation, and the entire GROUP was lying since the first day of the investigation.
Fascinating reading. Thanks PeterMac.

WHY haven't the McCanns, or the entire GROUP, SUED this chap?
Because if they did they might have to go into the witness box and give evidence under oath.
Remember that McCanns -v- TB was on a procedural point, brilliantly organised and manipulated by Carter-Ruck, which prevented the possibility of their clients ever having to give evidence.
The person who did so on their behalf had to admit, under oath in open Court that she knew of NO EVIDENCE to support the claim of abduction.
That also should be stated as often as we can.
Carter-Ruck admitted they had no evidence to support the claim of abduction.
It even had Mr Justice Tugendhat musing about what the legal situation would be if Madeleine had NOT been abducted.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by canada12 on 06.03.14 11:48

@jeanmonroe wrote:G) New interrogation of the Arguidos Kate and Gerry McCann;
------------------------------------------------------------

As the Portuguese have now re-opened their investigation and it is a 'live' investigation can they (PJ) now apply to the authorities to approve a new interrogation of Kate and Gerry McCann?

I think they'd likely respond the same way they did before - ie, they'd refuse to answer questions.

Mind you, if they were interrogated in the UK, under caution, I think they would still have the right to remain silent, but such silence could be used in a court of law against them.

"You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 193
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by ultimaThule on 06.03.14 11:51

@jeanmonroe wrote:G) New interrogation of the Arguidos Kate and Gerry McCann;
------------------------------------------------------------

As the Portuguese have now re-opened their investigation and it is a 'live' investigation can they (PJ) now apply to the authorities to approve a new interrogation of Kate and Gerry McCann?
From what I understand of the Portuguese penal code as available on the net, the PJ can indeed request the presence of the McCanns, together with those other British nationals who were present on the night of 3 May 2007, in Luz in order to establish the long overdue reconstruction of events, and should their request meet with refusal, the PJ can apply for whomsoever they choose to be made arguidos and returned to Portugal via extradition proceedings. 

However, for various reasons, not least because, even if or specifically because they have been extradited, co-operation is unlikely to be forthcoming, I very much doubt this is on the cards and suspect other plans have been made.

ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by jeanmonroe on 06.03.14 11:56

I very much doubt this is on the cards and suspect other plans have been made.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Care to explain? (other plans?)

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5162
Reputation : 914
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by Guest on 06.03.14 12:15

@Woofer wrote:
Poe wrote:
@Woofer wrote:
@Casey5 wrote:
@Okeydokey wrote:
@Casey5 wrote:Washing cuddle cat. Nobody with a missing child would have done that.

Not sure any of those are verified. Do you have sources for those?
Can only give sources for mine Okeydokey:-



From Kate's diary



http://www.mccannfiles.com/id166.html
 
THURSDAY, JULY 12: I hate the person who took my Madeleine—the same one who has caused all this trouble, who made us feel worthless and mistrustful and mainly who has frightened my beautiful Madeleine. I will never forgive that person/those people for this. Never.
 


I hope you don't mind Woofer but I've snipped the rest of your post because the paragraph from 12 July leapt out at me. There's just so much wrongness in that first sentence:

Why on earth would you feel worthless if your child was abducted? Angry - yes, but worthless? I cannot think of a single abduction scenario that would cause that emotion. However, I would feel worthless if I was responsible for my child's death.

And, of all the things an abductor could do, frightening my child would be at the bottom of the list of my worries.

Also, why does she need to emphasise Madeleine's beauty? All children are beautiful in the eyes of their parents but to me (and I fully expect God to smite me down for this blasphemy) Madeleine looks like your average, ordinary three/four year old.

Hello Poe - I think it was actually Casey5 that provided the link which I then quoted.  Yes, I thought those were odd things to write - you`d surely feel guilt if your child had been abducted, not worthlessness.  I wonder if this is a childhood script - the ingrained script received from parents. Taking a quote from Personality Adaptations by Vann Joines & Ian Stewart - "In narcissistic personality disorders the child develops into believing it is either wonderful or defective therefore the child adapts by always attempting to be wonderful but underneath the grandiose false-self facade is a terrified child who is afraid of ceasing to exist if he is not special and unique."   In times of crisis the adult would revert to script.

Yes, she is pre-occupied with the beauty of Madeleine but this, again, would fit with the narcissistic personality disorder.  One of the clues to NPD is "pre-occupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty and ideal love".

I thought is was weird writing that she hates the person who has taken her `and caused all this trouble` - eh !!!

Apologies to Casey5. These huge long strings of quotes send me cross-eyed.

@ Woofer, my mother is a narcissist and that quote describes her to a T. She tries to project an image of perfection to the point that she will argue black is white rather than admit to being wrong. My role, in public, is to be the pretty, clever, perfect daughter making her the perfect mother but in private I used to be subjected to verbal assaults as I could do and say nothing right. Reading your quote the penny dropped - if this had happened to me as a child rather than Madeleine, my mother would adopt the image of the grieving martyr while emphasising my perfection purely to enhance her own image.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by jeanmonroe on 06.03.14 12:17

PMac
The person who did so on their behalf had to admit, under oath in open Court that she knew of NO EVIDENCE to support the claim of abduction.
That also should be stated as often as we can.
Carter-Ruck admitted they had no evidence to support the claim of abduction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

And the McCanns own highly paid lawyer, Isabel Durate, in the ongoing libel case, as regards to 'abduction claim', will ONLY say "the McCann couple's THESIS"
-----------------------------------

ID - In which documentaries did you participate?
EL - corrects that she is actually the documentary maker. One was broadcast in May 2008, Madeleine McCann, one year on (ITV) and the other in May 2009, Madeleine was here (Ch4). In the first one she didn't use the word "abduction" and the McCanns, as arguidos, couldn't speak. The documentary is about the McCann European campaign.

ID - They were broadcast in how many countries in the EU?
EL - doesn't know.

ID - Are they based on the McCann couple's thesis?
EL - answers that in the second documentary an investigator (David Edgar, witness 3) says there are many theories but they investigate it on the basis that it was an abduction.
------------------------------------------------------------------

MANY 'THEORIES' DAVE?

BUT ONLY ONE 'THEORY', ACCORDING TO THE PARENTS OF THE 'MISSING' CHILD, THE MCCANNS, WHO ARE THE ONLY TWO PEOPLE TO HAVE SAID,

"ABDUCTION", "ABDUCTION", "ABDUCTION"

DAVE EDGAR, THE ONLY 'PROFESSIONAL INVESTIGATOR' EVER EMPLOYED BY THE MCCANNS IS, THEREFORE, TOTALLY WRONG TO SAY THERE ARE 'MANY THEORIES', (for 'disappearance' of Madeleine) ACCORDING TO HIS EMPLOYERS, THE MCCANNS.

THERE IS ONLY ONE!

"ABDUCTION"

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5162
Reputation : 914
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by ultimaThule on 06.03.14 12:26

@jeanmonroe wrote:I very much doubt this is on the cards and suspect other plans have been made.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Care to explain? (other plans?)

As I've said elsewhere on this forum it's my belief that if it is found that the McCanns have a case to answer they will be tried in the UK and it seems to me that, notwithstanding the fact that if extradited to face trial they may languish in Porguese prisons for a couple of years before the case comes to court, the McCanns will have far more to fear from trial by a jury of their peers who are not hampered by lack of a common language than a solitary judge operating in a justice system which is more inquisitorial than adversarial.

In the annals of British, and most probably in Portuguese, criminal history this case is virtually unique - and unique cases tend to evoke unique measures. 

This isn't what the McCanns want to hear, neither is it what they want known in case it results in a clamour for their immediate arrest and trial in the courts of England/Wales, but it won't be news to them as I have no doubt they have been appraised of every possible scenario by their highly paid lawyers.

ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by Landdownunder on 06.03.14 12:36

THURSDAY, JULY 12: 'I hate the person who took my Madeleine—the same one who has caused all this trouble, who made us feel worthless and mistrustful and mainly who has frightened my beautiful Madeleine. I will never forgive that person/those people for this. Never.'


I wonder if Kate is talking about Gerry here.
...the same one who has caused all this trouble...who made us (me & the kids/me and Madeleine) feel worthless & mistrustful...who has frightened my (not 'our') beautiful Madeleine...I will never forgive that person...

Worthless & mistrustful - this is how bullied / abused women & children often feel. All in my opinion only of course.

Landdownunder

Posts : 3
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by Guest on 06.03.14 12:49

@Landdownunder wrote:THURSDAY, JULY 12: 'I hate the person who took my Madeleine—the same one who has caused all this trouble, who made us feel worthless and mistrustful and mainly who has frightened my beautiful Madeleine. I will never forgive that person/those people for this. Never.'


I wonder if Kate is talking about Gerry here.
...the same one who has caused all this trouble...who made us (me & the kids/me and Madeleine) feel worthless & mistrustful...who has frightened my (not 'our') beautiful Madeleine...I will never forgive that person...

Worthless & mistrustful - this is how bullied / abused women & children often feel. All in my opinion only of course.

That's another possibility.

I think we can all agree that Kate told us more in those few lines than she ever intended to.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by jeanmonroe on 06.03.14 13:02

RED FLAG?

NONE of the women in the 'group', JT, FP, RO, KM mention the word 'abducted/abduction' in their Rogs or arguida interviews.

DW does say, but only referring to historical reference.

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5162
Reputation : 914
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by Research_Reader on 06.03.14 13:04

@jeanmonroe wrote:RED FLAG?

NONE of the women in the 'group', JT, FP, RO, KM  mention the word 'abducted/abduction' in their Rogs or arguida interviews.

DW does say, but only referring to historical reference.

Thats a big one. In reality if they'd thought an abductor or team of abductors were on the loose they would become obsessed/spooked by that danger, and be talking about wanting to protect their own children etc.

____________________

Research_Reader

Posts : 261
Reputation : 60
Join date : 2013-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by Guest on 06.03.14 13:07

Poe wrote:
@Landdownunder wrote:THURSDAY, JULY 12: 'I hate the person who took my Madeleine—the same one who has caused all this trouble, who made us feel worthless and mistrustful and mainly who has frightened my beautiful Madeleine. I will never forgive that person/those people for this. Never.'


I wonder if Kate is talking about Gerry here.
...the same one who has caused all this trouble...who made us (me & the kids/me and Madeleine) feel worthless & mistrustful...who has frightened my (not 'our') beautiful Madeleine...I will never forgive that person...

Worthless & mistrustful - this is how bullied / abused women & children often feel. All in my opinion only of course.

That's another possibility.

I think we can all agree that Kate told us more in those few lines than she ever intended to.

Kate is projecting onto to the "abductor".
This is how she really feels about herself.
As a narcissist she cannot take any responsiblity for anything that makes her look or feel bad.
If the scenario the MCs insist on were true, and KM had a little insight the paragraph might have read like this:

"As the mother of a child who disappeared though my own neglect, my own actions, my own selfishness I am worthless.
I did not protect my daughter as was my duty and responsibility.
I hate the person who took Madeleine and I will never forgive them. But I will also never forgive myself for allowing this to happen to her.
I knew the danger I exposed my child to and I am now mistrustful of my decisions."

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by PeterMac on 06.03.14 13:14

dantezebu wrote:
If the scenario the MCs insist on were true, and KM had a little insight the paragraph might have read like this:

"As the mother of a child who disappeared though my own neglect, my own actions, my own selfishness I am worthless.
I did not protect my daughter as was my duty and responsibility.
I hate the person who took Madeleine and I will never forgive them. But I will also never forgive myself for allowing this to happen to her.
I knew the danger I exposed my child to and I am now mistrustful of my decisions."

Neatly put. And adding even more certainty to the belief that what the McCanns say happened is emphatically NOT the truth.
"I know IT happened under other circumstances " in fact.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by Research_Reader on 06.03.14 13:20

I assume the aforementioned software systems that Peter Mac has described currently work on noting factual inconsistencies. However, I wonder in the future (with the increasing power of computers) if there will be equivalent systems that monitor videos of those involved, analysing minute facial expressions, voice stress analysis, speech patterns and the like for signs of probable lying. Like a more sophisticated version of a lie detector test, but with the benefit that you wouldn't even need the 'co-operation' of the person, just audio/video of them, to run the analysis.

____________________

Research_Reader

Posts : 261
Reputation : 60
Join date : 2013-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Red Flags

Post by kimHager on 06.03.14 13:24

See it bothers me that TM's whole demeanor we could probably all agree is a red flag, actions and feelings doesn't fit an abduction scenario. If they have nothing to hide then nothing needs to be hidden... Simple as that... If they would take the polygraph it would show up.. Whatever the truth is. I believe the lengths they have gone to to avoid answering questions and such is the biggest red flag. Why would they question the dogs? The dogs reputations aren't in question as animals don't lie....

____________________
Kim

kimHager

Posts : 465
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-01-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 23 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 13 ... 23  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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