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

What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Page 2 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by tigger on Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:18 am

@Rasputin wrote:Daily EXPRESS front page: “Madeleine: Seven children were sleeping in McCann apartment, claim police”

Page 9: “Another amazing claim by the police: Other couples’ children were in Madeleine’s apartment”

It is a “bombshell”. It could “destroy the credibility of the group – now dubbed the Tapas Nine” –who say their own children were in their own family apartments

Clarence Mitchell says: “If you put seven children together, you’re going to have a far harder time getting them to sleep then three”

We await a re-enactment

Says a “high-ranking Policia Judicaria officer: “Unless we are dealing with a sexual predator who had been following this little girl for quite some time, which is not probable because they had only been in the Algarve for six days, it would be highly unlikely she [Madeleine] would be chosen. In crimes of this nature, the criminals always look for younger children because they are easier to sell”

And easier to get off to sleep, right?

DAILY MAIL page 25: “Madeleine ‘was left in room with six other youngsters’”

“It’s utter rubbish,” says Clarence Mitchell

Portuguese newspaper 24 Horas tells of “significant evidence” that seven of the Tapas Nine’s eight children had been in the McCanns’ apartment on May 3

Thanks! Mitchell is simply the gift that keeps on giving!  big grin
Eta: Rebello didn't say that it was M with six others, but simply seven and I expect they'd have worked out which ones.
The only one not there is very likely to have been M.

@ Joyce, the sleeping arrangement was prob. In the Payne's flat, where the baby monitor was as well as being a bigger flat.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 25
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by sar on Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:58 am

...sorry, could be getting this wrong, but.  If the group of children were staying in another apt, what would "one" child be taken back to 5a, possibly alone for, perhaps only witnessed by KM and DP??

sar

Posts : 467
Reputation : 141
Join date : 2013-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Cristobell on Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:07 pm

What a palavar. A group of 9 lucid, erudite, adults could not come up with a simple way in which to ensure their children could sleep safely while they dined.

I'm not convinced about the children being put together in one apartment/bedroom, for all sorts of practical reasons. It is of course possible to get young children to sleep together in one room without disturbing each other - that would be the situation in the night creche. But the night creche had rules - parents had to stay with the young babies until they were asleep and presumably they would be phoned if any of the children woke up distressed, the parents would have their mobiles constantly at hand.

If all the children were put in one apartment, did the parents stay to settle their individual kids, or was the minder (the missing tapas member) given sole responsibility? Somehow, I don't see Gerry walking other people's babies up and down saying there, there, whilst changing nappies and mopping up sick. I suppose it all depends which one of them pulled the short straw.

The obvious solution for all the families, was to put their hands in their pockets and pay for babysitters. They can't have been that broke as individual tennis lessons do not come cheap. I would suggest: 1 tennis lesson = babysitter for night. They are either the cheapest, stingiest, most selfish group of adults on this earth, or there is a very good reason why they didn't want their evenings disturbed by calls to go and sort out their sick or distressed children.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by aquila on Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:17 pm

@Cristobell

Ask yourself why you would take a baby monitor on holiday if you had no predetermined intention of leaving your kids alone?

Why would a grandmother that you took on holiday think this was ok?

That's a 'state of the art' baby monitor btw. Not the 'other one' that was denied/confirmed/tested and found to be not usable by another of the Tapas 7.

Then there are the McCanns who took no baby monitor, no pushchair and felt so safe they left their patio doors open because it was like 'dining in your garden'.

aquila

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:28 pm

I know Russell and Rachael were both minders, I mean ill for a night, what about the other two nights (assuming they were all together on the Thursday at the Tapas? I wonder if Kate's sense of put-upon angst was further inflamed by her being required to stay back one night while her husband gallivanted with quiz mistresses and who knows who? Her narcissism would no doubt engender outrage at such a task.

If each couple had to volunteer a person to sit, you can bet it won't have been Gerry. IMO.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Cristobell on Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:56 pm

@aquila wrote:@Cristobell

Ask yourself why you would take a baby monitor on holiday if you had no predetermined intention of leaving your kids alone?

Why would a grandmother that you took on holiday think this was ok?

That's a 'state of the art' baby monitor btw. Not the 'other one' that was denied/confirmed/tested and found to be not usable by another of the Tapas 7.

Then there are the McCanns who took no baby monitor, no pushchair and felt so safe they left their patio doors open because it was like 'dining in your garden'.


It would appear the 'listening system' was pre-planned, perhaps they thought the apartments would be nearer to the restaurants?

Some grandmothers Aquila, are in awe of their children and their achievements and they accept their childrens' judgment over their own. Diana was unlikely to say anything in opposition to her daughter and the 5 other qualified doctors. Doctors are one of the few groups in society that we all address with their titles, we tend to accept, without question, that they know better than we do.

The McCanns imo, are absolutely clueless when it comes to parenting. They were in 2007 and they remain so now - can't believe they did not opt for the libel trial to be held in camera, and that they used their twins for sensational headlines - but I digress. Not taking a buggy, suggests they spent very little time looking after their own children and had no idea what a nightmare they would face everytime they stepped out of the door with 3 lively toddlers. When you have 2 of them strapped into a buggy, you have some sort of control, and two adults cannot carry 3 cranky toddlers, something's got to give.

As for the baby monitor. I've used them in the past whilst in the garden sunbathing. Though I hasten to add, when I say garden, it didn't have the acreage of Balmoral. On holiday, I suppose a baby monitor would be handy if you were sitting on your balcony, and your husband was a 'gadget' guy, but not really necessary.

That they have all stuck so rigidly to the checking system, suggests it was part of the pre holiday plans. One bright spark, probably a Butlins fan (Gerry?), suggested the listening system and they all patted themselves on the backs for being far more clever than the plebs who ran Warners. The creche and kids club were a big selling point, but they obviously turned their noses up at the evening childcare facilities for their own superior system. Which, apart from the loss of one child, they still see as infallible and will sue anyone who says otherwise. It was their holiday too!

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by canada12 on Thu Mar 13, 2014 1:57 pm

What were the Tapas 9 plans for after dinner on the fateful night? We've spent so much time focusing on the actual dinner and the 10pm "alarm" raised by Kate.

We've all accepted as a truth that dinner was the only thing planned for that evening. What did the group do on prior nights after dinner? Did they go on to other activities?

Did anyone ask them what their plans were for later that night, assuming their dinner wasn't interrupted by an abduction? I don't recall any questions in that direction by the police, interviewers, etc? All thinking seems to have stopped with the "abduction". All planning seems to have been around the "abduction".

canada12

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on Thu Mar 13, 2014 3:40 pm

That's a fair question

Do we know what they did the nights before?

We tend to see them as a tight, homogenous group, but weren't they in fact just thrown together, all 4 couples more or less acting on their own?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by jeanmonroe on Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:01 pm

@Portia wrote:That's a fair question

Do we know what they did the nights before?

We tend to see them as a tight, homogenous group, but weren't they in fact just thrown together, all 4 couples more or less acting on their own?

Well THREE couples were homogenous!

WHY didn't they 'invite' the McCann 'clan' to join them on the beach for tea and treats for the kids at the beach cafe?

What with Gerry's work colleagues and others, saying how 'popular and he was life and soul of the party'

MR POPULAR, who did NOT get an 'invite' to the beach 'outing' with the other families.

So I accept as true (OT) that the McCanns were not as popular, and important to others, as they so clearly THOUGHT.

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5165
Reputation : 918
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by canada12 on Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:39 pm

Or, the beach outing was pre-planned with the consent of Kate and Gerry, to create the illusion that the big cohesive group was there at the Paraiso, including Kate and Gerry.

Thus allowing Kate and Gerry to do whatever they needed to do in that time period, not at the Paraiso.

Perhaps counting on the idea that the serving staff wouldn't be able to pinpoint who was there and who wasn't there... until the CCTV footage surfaced and proved that Kate and Gerry weren't there - thus requiring a lot of backpedaling and laborious explanations as to why Kate had to run along the beach to see them, etc.

Just a thought.

canada12

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:43 pm

Or, if Kate and Gerry had fallen out, the rest of the group didn't invite them because it was best to leave them alone.

whatliesbehindthesofa

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by russiandoll on Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:51 pm

Canada 12, afaik Kate always maintained that she did tennis and running and never wanted to give the impression that she was at the Paraiso, nor did Gerry from what I recall of their statements.

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by PeterMac on Thu Mar 13, 2014 6:00 pm

Or - They had to get the rest out of the way, all together, at the Paraisio, for the first and last time
so that none of them could testify to NOT having seen Madeleine.
And Madeleine was son spirited away, suffering from chronic exhaustion after an afternoon finger-painting, a fact not noticed by her highly qualified doctor father
so exhabusted in fact that she had to be carried back to the apartment - BEFORE the rest arrived.
They Payne visits and sees children in WHITE  (if he did !)
But Madeleine was in PINK (if she was !)

Yet again Kate has provided too much detail, and when it is checked it is exposed.

Have a look at
http://www.lifespan.com/10-easy-ways-recognize-liars/?utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=referral

It describes the McCanns perfectly.
4. Liars provide additional information without being asked for it. They seem to think that by embellishing their story you will find it more believable. What happens is they tend to make the story more complicated and less believable. The more elaborate the story, the more likely that it is a fabrication and nothing near the truth.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by tigger on Thu Mar 13, 2014 6:36 pm

@Cristobell wrote:
@aquila wrote:@Cristobell

Ask yourself why you would take a baby monitor on holiday if you had no predetermined intention of leaving your kids alone?

Why would a grandmother that you took on holiday think this was ok?

That's a 'state of the art' baby monitor btw. Not the 'other one' that was denied/confirmed/tested and found to be not usable by another of the Tapas 7.

Then there are the McCanns who took no baby monitor, no pushchair and felt so safe they left their patio doors open because it was like 'dining in your garden'.


It would appear the 'listening system' was pre-planned, perhaps they thought the apartments would be nearer to the restaurants?  

Some grandmothers Aquila, are in awe of their children and their achievements and they accept their childrens' judgment over their own.  Diana was unlikely to say anything in opposition to her daughter and the 5 other qualified doctors.  Doctors are one of the few groups in society that we all address with their titles, we tend to accept, without question, that they know better than we do.  

The McCanns imo, are absolutely clueless when it comes to parenting. They were in 2007 and they remain so now - can't believe they did not opt for the libel trial to be held in camera, and that they used their twins for sensational headlines - but I digress.  Not taking a buggy, suggests they spent very little time looking after their own children and had no idea what a nightmare they would face everytime they stepped out of the door with 3 lively toddlers.  When you have 2 of them strapped into a buggy, you have some sort of control, and two adults cannot carry 3 cranky toddlers, something's got to give.  

As for the baby monitor.  I've used them in the past whilst in the garden sunbathing.  Though I hasten to add, when I say garden, it didn't have the acreage of Balmoral.  On holiday, I suppose a baby monitor would be handy if you were sitting on your balcony, and your husband was a 'gadget' guy, but not really necessary.  

That they have all stuck so rigidly to the checking system, suggests it was part of the pre holiday plans.  One bright spark, probably a Butlins fan (Gerry?), suggested the listening system and they all patted themselves on the backs for being far more clever than the plebs who ran Warners.  The creche and kids club were a big selling point, but they obviously turned their noses up at the evening childcare facilities for their own superior system.  Which, apart from the loss of one child, they still see as infallible and will sue anyone who says otherwise.  It was their holiday too!

Personally I would believe the PJ over  any of the T9. ALL their statements are suspect and many have changed their statements or contradicted themselves.
Rebello has a sharp intellect as anyone reading his report would understand.
The PJ also did their own DNA tests.

A different member of the group  was sick every evening.
DP had a baby monitor, so did ROB and JT. I don't think it was out of order, I think she was told to say so. In fact they both said they had no baby monitor in their early statements, a straight lie. Soon after the Rothley meeting this second baby monitor appeared  in the press. In the rogs it was played down again as malfunctioning. Why would they deny having one? No neglect, no abduction.
So that's a minder and two baby monitors for apparently seven children. Makes sense to me for the minder to ask for help as and when needed.
The sleeping arrangements of the Payne's bear out the above. Iirc DW slept on the sofa. That leaves a bedroom free.

Without neglect there could be no abduction. But doctors know better than most the terrible injuries a child can sustain in simple accidents.

Waiters from the Tapas iirc have also stated that nobody left the table, except on the 3rd.

@ Dee Coy:  you bet! Babysitting wouldn't be for the likes of Gerald. That sort of thing happens to other people.

Eta: what I find most important here is the number seven, it's very likely that Maddie was nr. 8 and not in the group.
So where was she?
Is it possible that on the 1st the twins stayed in 5a  and cried  because they were alone? I.e not with the other children.
One more thing: an alleged remark by Gerry when the twins were moved to the Payne's on the 3rd: taking them to their   own apartment..

Next in importance imo is the leak from a Spanish journalist acquianted with Metodo3. It was important to re-enforce the neglect right at that time.
The same trick was played later with the diary - for different reasons. That was to emphasise the suffering of Saint Kate.
Some people love being martyrs.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 25
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by ultimaThule on Thu Mar 13, 2014 6:39 pm

@canada12 wrote:What were the Tapas 9 plans for after dinner on the fateful night? We've spent so much time focusing on the actual dinner and the 10pm "alarm" raised by Kate.

We've all accepted as a truth that dinner was the only thing planned for that evening. What did the group do on prior nights after dinner? Did they go on to other activities?

Did anyone ask them what their plans were for later that night, assuming their dinner wasn't interrupted by an abduction? I don't recall any questions in that direction by the police, interviewers, etc? All thinking seems to have stopped with the "abduction". All planning seems to have been around the "abduction".
There are reports from Luz's locals to the effect that the group were seen at night sans offspring in Chaplins, which happens to have Skytv and shows UK sporting events for the benefit of holidaymakers and ex-pats.

There's an interview in which Kate claims the group were considering eating at the Millenium with their children on the 3rd, but there was some hesitation before she revealed the intended venue which made me wonder if the intention was for the adults to spend their penultimate night at one of Luz's restaurants,    

I have heard of those who go on all-inclusive holidays abroad and never leave the confines of the hotel/complex, but this was a half-board holiday in self-catering apartments with various facilities for adults and children spread over a fairly wide area and I find it curious that not one of the 9 adults took themselves off for a mooch around the town, viewing the architecture, observing the locals going about their everyday business, taking coffee or lunch at one of the numerous bars/restaurants, browsing the shops, or simply admiring the view from the seashore while reading a book in blissful solitude.

Other than purchasing foodstuffs from the Baptista, there are no accounts of any of them buying small items for their children or for themselves, no trips to the market for fresh, locally grown produce, no hunt for souvenirs to take home for friends/relatives or neighbours who may have been keeping an eye on their property or caring for pets in their absence.  In short, there's nothing which suggests this was anything like any of the holidays I've taken with friends and family.  

Were all of them on a tight budget and financially unable to indulge in any of those fripperies which, for me at least, make holidays enjoyable and provide tangible reminders of time spent out of the UK?

I also find it odd that, with the exception of their evening meet-ups, the Tapas 7 appear to have extended a bonhomie to each other which wasn't accorded to the McCanns, with the group breakfasting together at the Millenium and lunching in the Paynes' apartment while G&K were left to fend for themselves and their children in 5A. 

Could it be that the McCanns were regarded as only to be taken in small doses and that, for all Kate claimed the group were 'into each other', the Tapas 7 weren't into G&K?  If this were the case, why would they risk their necks for them?

ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on Thu Mar 13, 2014 6:41 pm

@PeterMac wrote: [...]
Yet again Kate has provided too much detail, and when it is checked it is exposed.

Have a look at
http://www.lifespan.com/10-easy-ways-recognize-liars/?utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=referral

It describes the McCanns perfectly.
4. Liars provide additional information without being asked for it. They seem to think that by embellishing their story you will find it more believable. What happens is they tend to make the story more complicated and less believable. The more elaborate the story, the more likely that it is a fabrication and nothing near the truth.
***
That exactly is my sad experience from many, many years ....

If you're interested, I can give you some examples  winkwink 

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by ultimaThule on Thu Mar 13, 2014 6:55 pm

@tigger wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
@aquila wrote:@Cristobell

Ask yourself why you would take a baby monitor on holiday if you had no predetermined intention of leaving your kids alone?

Why would a grandmother that you took on holiday think this was ok?

That's a 'state of the art' baby monitor btw. Not the 'other one' that was denied/confirmed/tested and found to be not usable by another of the Tapas 7.

Then there are the McCanns who took no baby monitor, no pushchair and felt so safe they left their patio doors open because it was like 'dining in your garden'.


It would appear the 'listening system' was pre-planned, perhaps they thought the apartments would be nearer to the restaurants?  

Some grandmothers Aquila, are in awe of their children and their achievements and they accept their childrens' judgment over their own.  Diana was unlikely to say anything in opposition to her daughter and the 5 other qualified doctors.  Doctors are one of the few groups in society that we all address with their titles, we tend to accept, without question, that they know better than we do.  

The McCanns imo, are absolutely clueless when it comes to parenting. They were in 2007 and they remain so now - can't believe they did not opt for the libel trial to be held in camera, and that they used their twins for sensational headlines - but I digress.  Not taking a buggy, suggests they spent very little time looking after their own children and had no idea what a nightmare they would face everytime they stepped out of the door with 3 lively toddlers.  When you have 2 of them strapped into a buggy, you have some sort of control, and two adults cannot carry 3 cranky toddlers, something's got to give.  

As for the baby monitor.  I've used them in the past whilst in the garden sunbathing.  Though I hasten to add, when I say garden, it didn't have the acreage of Balmoral.  On holiday, I suppose a baby monitor would be handy if you were sitting on your balcony, and your husband was a 'gadget' guy, but not really necessary.  

That they have all stuck so rigidly to the checking system, suggests it was part of the pre holiday plans.  One bright spark, probably a Butlins fan (Gerry?), suggested the listening system and they all patted themselves on the backs for being far more clever than the plebs who ran Warners.  The creche and kids club were a big selling point, but they obviously turned their noses up at the evening childcare facilities for their own superior system.  Which, apart from the loss of one child, they still see as infallible and will sue anyone who says otherwise.  It was their holiday too!

Personally I would believe the PJ over  any of the T9. ALL their statements are suspect and many have changed their statements or contradicted themselves.
Rebello has a sharp intellect as anyone reading his report would understand.
The PJ also did their own DNA tests.

A different member of the group  was sick every evening.
DP had a baby monitor, so did ROB and JT. I don't think it was out of order, I think she was told to say so. In fact they both said they had no baby monitor in their early statements, a straight lie. Soon after the Rothley meeting this second baby monitor appeared  in the press. In the rogs it was played down again as malfunctioning. Why would they deny having one? No neglect, no abduction.
So that's a minder and two baby monitors for apparently seven children. Makes sense to me for the minder to ask for help as and when needed.
The sleeping arrangements of the Payne's bear out the above. Iirc DW slept on the sofa. That leaves a bedroom free.

Without neglect there could be no abduction. But doctors know better than most the terrible injuries a child can sustain in simple accidents.

Waiters from the Tapas iirc have also stated that nobody left the table, except on the 3rd.

@ Dee Coy:  you bet! Babysitting wouldn't be for the likes of Gerald. That sort of thing happens to other people.

Eta: what I find most important here is the number seven, it's very likely that Maddie was nr. 8 and not in the group.
So where was she?
Is it possible that on the 1st the twins stayed in 5a  and cried  because they were alone? I.e not with the other children.
One more thing: an alleged remark by Gerry when the twins were moved to the Payne's on the 3rd: taking them to their   own apartment..

Next in importance imo is the leak from a Spanish journalist acquianted with Metodo3. It was important to re-enforce the neglect right at that time.
The same trick was played later with the diary - for different reasons. That was to emphasise the suffering of Saint Kate.
Some people love being martyrs.
There's a part in Webster's rog where she doesn't appear to be too sure what apartment she and her daughter/son-in-law/grandchildren were staying in.  

There were at least 2 x 2 bedroom apartments allocated to group, and I seem to recall it may have only been the Oldfields who occupied a 1 bed apartment.  

JT claimed her baby monitor was less reliable than the Paynes' 'state of the art' model but she that didn't stop her taking it with her to the Tapas every night.  

4 lightly sedated infants in one bedroom, the older children in another, and 2 x monitors = no need for anyone to check them during the course of the evening.  

Or babysitting provided by rota whereby a different member of the group lolled in front of the tv each night with their Tapas meal being brought to them by one of the others while the children were arranged as above?

ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by tigger on Thu Mar 13, 2014 7:15 pm

From uT's post above:
I also find it odd that, with the exception of their evening meet-ups, the Tapas 7 appear to have extended a bonhomie to each other which wasn't accorded to the McCanns, with the group breakfasting together at the Millenium and lunching in the Paynes' apartment while G&K were left to fend for themselves and their children in 5A.
Unquote

More support for the private creche I feel. Children would have a sleep after lunch and lunch was always at the Paynes, but the McCanns never attended.
So it would also make sense in terms of the children's routine.

As for MO, allegedly he suffered gastro enteritis the night before, for which he stayed in the apartment, yet went on a long run with Kate the next morning. Dr. roberts again, the run with the yappy dogs Kate didn't like.

Then there is the uncanny sensitivity and the many slips of the McCanns that the twins slept on a bed. I'm convinced the whole convoluted rumpled bed story is to cover that fact.
Now I interpreted the no sheets in the cots as just that, whilst the twins were in them.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 25
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on Thu Mar 13, 2014 7:20 pm

@tigger wrote:

As for MO, allegedly he suffered gastro enteritis the night before, for which he stayed in the apartment, yet went on a long run with Kate the next morning. Dr. roberts again, the run with the yappy dogs Kate didn't like.

All this illness is a bit of a red flag in itself. Portugal isn't the Central African Republic. You can drink the water. You can eat the food. There isn't an Iberian equivalent of "Delhi belly". It wasn't even that hot for any of them to be feeling the effects of the sun.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by ultimaThule on Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:42 pm

Clay Regazzoni wrote:
@tigger wrote:

As for MO, allegedly he suffered gastro enteritis the night before, for which he stayed in the apartment, yet went on a long run with Kate the next morning. Dr. roberts again, the run with the yappy dogs Kate didn't like.

All this illness is a bit of a red flag in itself. Portugal isn't the Central African Republic. You can drink the water. You can eat the food. There isn't an Iberian equivalent of "Delhi belly". It wasn't even that hot for any of them to be feeling the effects of the sun.
All adults eating the same food, all drinking the same water?  I'd expect them to all be stricken on the same day or night.

ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by russiandoll on Fri Mar 14, 2014 9:09 am

I would certainly expect doctors with some knowledge of gastro-intestinal health , once they knew that the resort was the issue, to have waved bye bye to tapas and made arrangements to eat elsewhere evenings, early with kids , or later and use the night crèche.

 They could have had a chance to taste village nightlife and food in the knowledge that all children were safe and well at a crèche, with the very slight inconvenience to the little ones of a short disturbance while they were moved.
 one of the McCann children would have needed carrying, but they had transport for 2 as seen on CW.

 The book of truth mentioned a hired buggy...CW showed that there was no need for that as the Mcs arrived with the type of pushchair we saw so often during their stay over summer.

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on Fri Mar 14, 2014 9:10 am

@ultimaThule wrote:
@canada12 wrote:What were the Tapas 9 plans for after dinner on the fateful night? We've spent so much time focusing on the actual dinner and the 10pm "alarm" raised by Kate.

We've all accepted as a truth that dinner was the only thing planned for that evening. What did the group do on prior nights after dinner? Did they go on to other activities?

Did anyone ask them what their plans were for later that night, assuming their dinner wasn't interrupted by an abduction? I don't recall any questions in that direction by the police, interviewers, etc? All thinking seems to have stopped with the "abduction". All planning seems to have been around the "abduction".
There are reports from Luz's locals to the effect that the group were seen at night sans offspring in Chaplins, which happens to have Skytv and shows UK sporting events for the benefit of holidaymakers and ex-pats.

There's an interview in which Kate claims the group were considering eating at the Millenium with their children on the 3rd, but there was some hesitation before she revealed the intended venue which made me wonder if the intention was for the adults to spend their penultimate night at one of Luz's restaurants,    

I have heard of those who go on all-inclusive holidays abroad and never leave the confines of the hotel/complex, but this was a half-board holiday in self-catering apartments with various facilities for adults and children spread over a fairly wide area and I find it curious that not one of the 9 adults took themselves off for a mooch around the town, viewing the architecture, observing the locals going about their everyday business, taking coffee or lunch at one of the numerous bars/restaurants, browsing the shops, or simply admiring the view from the seashore while reading a book in blissful solitude.

Other than purchasing foodstuffs from the Baptista, there are no accounts of any of them buying small items for their children or for themselves, no trips to the market for fresh, locally grown produce, no hunt for souvenirs to take home for friends/relatives or neighbours who may have been keeping an eye on their property or caring for pets in their absence.  In short, there's nothing which suggests this was anything like any of the holidays I've taken with friends and family.  

Were all of them on a tight budget and financially unable to indulge in any of those fripperies which, for me at least, make holidays enjoyable and provide tangible reminders of time spent out of the UK?

I also find it odd that, with the exception of their evening meet-ups, the Tapas 7 appear to have extended a bonhomie to each other which wasn't accorded to the McCanns, with the group breakfasting together at the Millenium and lunching in the Paynes' apartment while G&K were left to fend for themselves and their children in 5A. 

Could it be that the McCanns were regarded as only to be taken in small doses and that, for all Kate claimed the group were 'into each other', the Tapas 7 weren't into G&K?  If this were the case, why would they risk their necks for them?

An attempt to get Gerry to lighten up as they were travelling to Portugal met with a forthright Anglo Saxon response and Kate threw a strop when Gerry flirted with the quiz lady.

Neither of these two incidents strikes me as an isolated fit of bad-temper. They are more like explosions of tension in an ongoing war and these are the ones we know about. There may have been others.

If that was the case, with the bad atmosphere it would have caused, it's no wonder they were ostracised during the day. 

In the evenings, who knows? Possibly they were tolerated but not actually part of the clique. Can you imagine what that would have done to Gerry - the big I am - left to languish on the outskirts of the group?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on Fri Mar 14, 2014 9:30 am

Poe

An attempt to get Gerry to lighten up as they were travelling to Portugal met with a forthright Anglo Saxon response and Kate threw a strop when Gerry flirted with the quiz lady. Neither of these two incidents strikes me as an isolated fit of bad-temper. They are more like explosions of tension in an ongoing war and these are the ones we know about. There may have been others.

If that was the case, with the bad atmosphere it would have caused, it's no wonder they were ostracised during the day. In the evenings, who knows? Possibly they were tolerated but not actually part of the clique. Can you imagine what that would have done to Gerry - the big I am - left to languish on the outskirts of the group

Good points Poe. One thing I always thought was strange was if someone, presumably DP, videoed Gerry et al on the airport bus trip, why were there not other short phone videos made, eg trip to the hotel complex the other end, the kids first seeing the apartments etc? Just struck me as strange that there is only one piece of mobile phone footage. And why record the journey there rather than the arrival at the destination?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on Fri Mar 14, 2014 10:43 am

MILLIE wrote:
Poe

An attempt to get Gerry to lighten up as they were travelling to Portugal met with a forthright Anglo Saxon response and Kate threw a strop when Gerry flirted with the quiz lady. Neither of these two incidents strikes me as an isolated fit of bad-temper. They are more like explosions of tension in an ongoing war and these are the ones we know about. There may have been others.

If that was the case, with the bad atmosphere it would have caused, it's no wonder they were ostracised during the day. In the evenings, who knows? Possibly they were tolerated but not actually part of the clique. Can you imagine what that would have done to Gerry - the big I am - left to languish on the outskirts of the group

Good points Poe. One thing I always thought was strange was if someone, presumably DP, videoed Gerry et al on the airport bus trip, why were there not other short phone videos made, eg trip to the hotel complex the other end, the kids first seeing the apartments etc? Just struck me as strange that there is only one piece of mobile phone footage. And why record the journey there rather than the arrival at the destination?

[size=12.727272033691406]Maybe the other mobile phone footage is just normal happy families arriving at the Ocean Club giving Gerry a wide-berth because they don't want their kids to hear language like that.[/size]


[size=12.727272033691406]I think that piece of footage was released for a reason. [/size]


[size=12.727272033691406]P.S. Sorry about the extra bits on my post - I didn't put them there and I don't know how to delete them.[/size]

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Doug D on Fri Mar 14, 2014 11:17 am

Poe:
 
‘I think that piece of footage was released for a reason’
 
Did it not help to create the  ‘explanation for the blood’ from M’s cut knees.

Doug D

Posts : 2184
Reputation : 674
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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