Madeleine McCann search digs up the haters and misguided conspiracy theorists

Tasprin thanks for the diagram of dog alerts.

That bit in the burley piece 'smothered by a blanket' has bothered me so much.  Took me ages to get to sleep last night so I'm going to write this in the hope once I've got it down I might have a better sleep.

The night of the crying kate is there alone, gerry at the bar (quiz mistress) kate upset.  Maddie wakes won't go back to sleep (Kate's woken her whilst having the rage, who said the broken bed happened the night maddie disappeRed? We only have Kate's word).

She takes it out on maddie. (Phone records put her in the apartment at this time I believe).  Maddie is screaming for her daddy.  Kate cannot calm her & flips out smothering her.

Gerry returns, kate cradling her dead daughter (clothes pick up the scent) full of remorse/alternatively she puts maddie behind the sofa trying. To make it look like an accident.

They agree to cover it up.  Maddie is placed in the blue bag (here contamination may have occurred behind sofa if they stored the bag behind it). Gerry calls in favours from some of the T7, bag placed in garden for collection, madeleine is disposed of.  Bag back in wardrobe, contaminating wardrobe area.

At least a day & a bit left to come up with the idea of abduction, clean up, etc.

Car? Contamination from the blue bag that was disposed of along with the blanket.

Stands up as a theory?

The true intent behind Kay's article is as plain as day to me.

Shhh wrote:Tasprin thanks for the diagram of dog alerts.

That bit in the burley piece 'smothered by a blanket' has bothered me so much.  Took me ages to get to sleep last night so I'm going to write this in the hope once I've got it down I might have a better sleep.

The night of the crying kate is there alone, gerry at the bar (quiz mistress) kate upset.  Maddie wakes won't go back to sleep (Kate's woken her whilst having the rage, who said the broken bed happened the night maddie disappeRed? We only have Kate's word).

She takes it out on maddie. (Phone records put her in the apartment at this time I believe).  Maddie is screaming for her daddy.  Kate cannot calm her & flips out smothering her.

Gerry returns, kate cradling her dead daughter (clothes pick up the scent) full of remorse/alternatively she puts maddie behind the sofa trying. To make it look like an accident.

They agree to cover it up.  Maddie is placed in the blue bag (here contamination may have occurred behind sofa if they stored the bag behind it). Gerry calls in favours from some of the T7, bag placed in garden for collection, madeleine is disposed of.  Bag back in wardrobe, contaminating wardrobe area.

At least a day & a bit left to come up with the idea of abduction, clean up, etc.

Car? Contamination from the blue bag that was disposed of along with the blanket.

Stands up as a theory?

A fairly plausible theory Shhh yes.

Although, if that WAS the scenario then i see NO reason why the rest of the tapas lot would risk everything and be willing to cover all that up for such a long period of time. 

The broken bed you referred to. Have you a link to this? Have not heard of that before.

The wardrobe, back of sofa etc may not be accurate as locations. Cadaver odour is airborne and could have pooled in a particular place due to air currents.

Shhh, that is very plausible theory in my view. It covers an awful lot of ground and would fit a timeline that allows for the apartment having been cleaned, yet cadaver odour having the time to contaminate various items/locations. Good work. 

On the night of the crying, was Madeleine crying for her 'daddy', or was somebody calling out 'Maddie'? As has been posted by others on numerous occasions, I have always been troubled by the 'she was never known as Maddie' line spouted by the McCanns given that she was universally known as Maddie in the weeks after news of her disappearance first broke.

Why do they insist she was never known as Maddie?

Dee Coy wrote:There is no way, NO WAY, that Burley would have mentioned the cadaver dogs and their evidence if she was writing this article as a 'Pro'. End of.

I agree Dee Coy,   She put in a lot of info that I'm sure would have angered the Mccann's  - whilst appearing to be supportive of them she let a lot of negative stuff out of the bag that has not seen the light of day before now.

Also noticed she didn't even try to place them  " close by"   when she mentioned they were dining in a restaurant in the resort  - now thats the first time that I'm aware of that a reporter has not placed the parents dining  " close by"  to where their children were sleeping alone in the apartment .

fossey wrote:

Shhh wrote:Tasprin thanks for the diagram of dog alerts.

That bit in the burley piece 'smothered by a blanket' has bothered me so much.  Took me ages to get to sleep last night so I'm going to write this in the hope once I've got it down I might have a better sleep.

The night of the crying kate is there alone, gerry at the bar (quiz mistress) kate upset.  Maddie wakes won't go back to sleep (Kate's woken her whilst having the rage, who said the broken bed happened the night maddie disappeRed? We only have Kate's word).

She takes it out on maddie. (Phone records put her in the apartment at this time I believe).  Maddie is screaming for her daddy.  Kate cannot calm her & flips out smothering her.

Gerry returns, kate cradling her dead daughter (clothes pick up the scent) full of remorse/alternatively she puts maddie behind the sofa trying. To make it look like an accident.

They agree to cover it up.  Maddie is placed in the blue bag (here contamination may have occurred behind sofa if they stored the bag behind it). Gerry calls in favours from some of the T7, bag placed in garden for collection, madeleine is disposed of.  Bag back in wardrobe, contaminating wardrobe area.

At least a day & a bit left to come up with the idea of abduction, clean up, etc.

Car? Contamination from the blue bag that was disposed of along with the blanket.

Stands up as a theory?

A fairly plausible theory Shhh yes.

Although, if that WAS the scenario then i see NO reason why the rest of the tapas lot would risk everything and be willing to cover all that up for such a long period of time. 

The broken bed you referred to. Have you a link to this? Have not heard of that before.

Just need to get the apparent blood splatter in there, otherwise I think you'd have nailed it! 

TheTruthWillOut wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

TheTruthWillOut wrote:
The question remains is why Mitchell wanted/needed to do this and why the McCanns went along with it? 
I can't get my head round it. No scenario totally adds up.

Because they had to prove that Madeline was still alive and well at lunchtime on 3rd.
No one saw her on 3rd
Tapas group were banished to the `paraiso bar, first and last time
Kate was sent on a jog, to run PAST the paraiso, to give everyone including herself an alibi . . .

Then the family meet for tea, with Kate saying in one "version" she arrived to find them at tea, and in another "version", signing M out of the creche
The M is terminally fatigued and has to be carried back, then only P 'sees' her, or not for 30 minutes or 30 seconds, with Kate either naked or not and the children dressed in WHITE, (Not pink with eeyore)
Come on ! ! !

The Last Photo was Mitchell's finest Hour.
And we have blown it out of the water.

And, Yes Grange and several other people know all about it.

But will/is it being used is the $64,000 question. It also must require a very powerful reason for the Tapas 7, nannies and maybe some other people to keep quiet.

An accident wouldn't have this level of cover-up IMO.

Honestly, I think a bunch of yahoo GP's wazzing out on coke and wine, bonking each other's wives, with an embarrassing under-current of pedophilia, whether it was a sex crime or not, in the light of the sedating of kids would be enough to cause a few influential people to want to see it brushed under a carpet if, and only if, they were convinced it was an accident...

Daryl Dixon wrote:The wardrobe, back of sofa etc may not be accurate as locations. Cadaver odour is airborne and could have pooled in a particular place due to air currents.

Cadaverine is a contact substance, no? A liquid seepage not a gas. A gas will attempt to fill any available space and dissipate. It does not 'pool' per se. My understanding is that the dogs are trained to locate cadaverine, rather than merely the gaseous 'whiff of death.'

TMH wrote:I agree. Who is she to call people haters? She's just a newsreader who is jumping on the bandwagon as this is such a high profile story. She's just done it to cause controversy.

I really don't think there's a subliminal message in her piece whatsoever.

Got it one there TMH.

Yes bandwagon because if another 9/11 incident happened tomorrow all the concerned ( fake concern ) news readers ( that is all they are)
would drop the dig in order to get THAT exclusive ( read my name at the bottom of the screen ) for themselves and the people that pay them.

Vanity meets insanity.

 I think that this latest SY venture really is just that - a venture. It does appear to me and many others that SY are clutching at straws here.

The 8 people they wish to interview will have to be justified to the PJ as a lot of alleged journalists and some PR people think any interviewing
will be carried out by SY. The  PJ  have absolute jurisdiction in the case and will say yeah or nay as the may if anything comes from the digging.

Yet I do detect a creeping element of frustration from the MSM too at the pace of the SY investigation and the expected results that ithasn't yielded for them.

Of course because of the MSM's constant desire   to get their story out first before the other media outlets do, then checkable facts become a series of ' allegedleys " - " a source said " etc etc. Which is why blacksmith's latest offering is spot on. The MSM's initial reporting from PdL
on May the 3rd was kind of  unknowing ( a race for A story - not THE story - the one that has lasted for around 7 years) and it was reported for a certain time as seen. Many years of feeding the MSM THE story has resulted in the normal lazy journalism we see today. From Stephen Lawrence- Hillsborough to the Levenson enquiry - Jimmy Saville and so on all these stories were around to be sought out at the time and not one journalist worth their salt blew the whistle as it were. Anyone who did ( like Dr Kelly ) were hung out like washing. Gilligan should hang his head in shame.

One thing you can say is that despite the " Haters" if not for the net and it's alleged conspiracy theories the MSM wouldn't have a clue what
really was going on. That's why I agree wholeheartedly with blacksmith's latest post.

The most disheartening thing for me is that the emerging stories of future years are happening right now and if left to the MSM nothing would happen. So Kate Burley shall we wait around 20 years to find out the current Jimmy Savile or what happened to the Malaysian plane or should we wait until you lot are ready to jump on the banwagon after the " haters" have revealed it in real time?

The balls no longer in your court and worse you know it.

CynicAl wrote:

Daryl Dixon wrote:The wardrobe, back of sofa etc may not be accurate as locations. Cadaver odour is airborne and could have pooled in a particular place due to air currents.

Cadaverine is a contact substance, no? A liquid seepage not a gas. A gas will attempt to fill any available space and dissipate. It does not 'pool' per se. My understanding is that the dogs are trained to locate cadaverine, rather than merely the gaseous 'whiff of death.'

And, Dixon, are we to believe Keela's blood traces were airborne too? Obviously not, so it's strange to say the least that the hitherto liquid molecules of cadaverine, now gaseous and airborne managed to 'pool' themselves precisely next to the blood, wouldn't you say?

missmar1 wrote:

Dee Coy wrote:There is no way, NO WAY, that Burley would have mentioned the cadaver dogs and their evidence if she was writing this article as a 'Pro'. End of.

I agree Dee Coy,   She put in a lot of info that I'm sure would have angered the Mccann's  - whilst appearing to be supportive of them she let a lot of negative stuff out of the bag that has not seen the light of day before now.

Also noticed she didn't even try to place them  " close by"   when she mentioned they were dining in a restaurant in the resort  - now thats the first time that I'm aware of that a reporter has not placed the parents dining  " close by"  to where their children were sleeping alone in the apartment .

I absolutely agree with you both. 100% 
I may not like the term 'hater' used, but I'm sure there may be a few beds being kicked in Rothley Towers at the moment...

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:The true intent behind Kay's article is as plain as day to me.

Clear as mud to me.Can you explain please.

Dee Coy wrote:

CynicAl wrote:

Daryl Dixon wrote:The wardrobe, back of sofa etc may not be accurate as locations. Cadaver odour is airborne and could have pooled in a particular place due to air currents.

Cadaverine is a contact substance, no? A liquid seepage not a gas. A gas will attempt to fill any available space and dissipate. It does not 'pool' per se. My understanding is that the dogs are trained to locate cadaverine, rather than merely the gaseous 'whiff of death.'

And, Dixon, are we to believe Keela's blood traces were airborne too? Obviously not, so it's strange to say the least that the hitherto liquid molecules of cadaverine, now gaseous and airborne managed to 'pool' themselves precisely next to the blood, wouldn't you say?

From all I have read on the subject of EVRD dogs, you are correct Dee Coy - it is a contact substance, not a gaseous pooling substance. It also takes a while of sustained contact to develop on items. 
No getting away from why the locations and articles were alerted to. 
I now have a vision of gaseous cadaverine creeping towards the bloodied areas like something out of Ghostbusters! Ectoplasm?

rainbow-fairy wrote:

Dee Coy wrote:

CynicAl wrote:

Daryl Dixon wrote:The wardrobe, back of sofa etc may not be accurate as locations. Cadaver odour is airborne and could have pooled in a particular place due to air currents.

Cadaverine is a contact substance, no? A liquid seepage not a gas. A gas will attempt to fill any available space and dissipate. It does not 'pool' per se. My understanding is that the dogs are trained to locate cadaverine, rather than merely the gaseous 'whiff of death.'

And, Dixon, are we to believe Keela's blood traces were airborne too? Obviously not, so it's strange to say the least that the hitherto liquid molecules of cadaverine, now gaseous and airborne managed to 'pool' themselves precisely next to the blood, wouldn't you say?

From all I have read on the subject of EVRD dogs, you are correct Dee Coy - it is a contact substance, not a gaseous pooling substance. It also takes a while of sustained contact to develop on items. 
No getting away from why the locations and articles were alerted to. 
I now have a vision of gaseous cadaverine creeping towards the bloodied areas like something out of Ghostbusters! Ectoplasm?

If you listen carefully to Martin Grime in the video of Eddie and the wardrobe (full version, I think when he first alerts), he says something along the lines of the scent/odour maybe pooling in the corner by the wardrobe. Due to the weather conditions and the apartment having been sealed. 
I think this was before the alert inside the wardrobe though, so I think he must have dismissed the idea later.
I have posted on this before somewhere some time ago, but it is confusing.

cassius wrote:

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:The true intent behind Kay's article is as plain as day to me.

Clear as mud to me.Can you explain please.

It is clear to me too. Whether WLBTS agrees with my view, I have no idea.  

My opinion is that a 'pro' will never mention the dogs (on pain of death it seems) plus many other points raised (albeit in a seemingly McCann supportive article)

Justformaddie wrote:

fossey wrote:

Shhh wrote:Tasprin thanks for the diagram of dog alerts.

That bit in the burley piece 'smothered by a blanket' has bothered me so much.  Took me ages to get to sleep last night so I'm going to write this in the hope once I've got it down I might have a better sleep.

The night of the crying kate is there alone, gerry at the bar (quiz mistress) kate upset.  Maddie wakes won't go back to sleep (Kate's woken her whilst having the rage, who said the broken bed happened the night maddie disappeRed? We only have Kate's word).

She takes it out on maddie. (Phone records put her in the apartment at this time I believe).  Maddie is screaming for her daddy.  Kate cannot calm her & flips out smothering her.

Gerry returns, kate cradling her dead daughter (clothes pick up the scent) full of remorse/alternatively she puts maddie behind the sofa trying. To make it look like an accident.

They agree to cover it up.  Maddie is placed in the blue bag (here contamination may have occurred behind sofa if they stored the bag behind it). Gerry calls in favours from some of the T7, bag placed in garden for collection, madeleine is disposed of.  Bag back in wardrobe, contaminating wardrobe area.

At least a day & a bit left to come up with the idea of abduction, clean up, etc.

Car? Contamination from the blue bag that was disposed of along with the blanket.

Stands up as a theory?

A fairly plausible theory Shhh yes.

Although, if that WAS the scenario then i see NO reason why the rest of the tapas lot would risk everything and be willing to cover all that up for such a long period of time. 

The broken bed you referred to. Have you a link to this? Have not heard of that before.

Just need to get the apparent blood splatter in there, otherwise I think you'd have nailed it! 

Threw her in rage at the wall her scull fracturing or nose splatting .  

sso thats not nice to read,surprised at you.

Parents have been known to inflict injuries on their their children which cause death, Bellisa.

It seems Leicestershire Police were minded to believe that Kate caused the death of her eldest daughter and, if that should be the case, the probable pain and suffering Madeleine endured before she died would not make for pleasant reading.  

Imo the only possible reason the child's body was concealed is because a post-mortem would have revealed that she sustained a non-accidental injury, or injuries,which proved fatal.

XTC

One thing you can say is that despite the " Haters" if not for the net and it's alleged conspiracy theories the MSM wouldn't have a clue what
really was going on. That's why I agree wholeheartedly with blacksmith's latest post.

The most disheartening thing for me is that the emerging stories of future years are happening right now and if left to the MSM nothing would happen. So Kate Burley shall we wait around 20 years to find out the current Jimmy Savile or what happened to the Malaysian plane or should we wait until you lot are ready to jump on the banwagon after the " haters" have revealed it in real time?

The balls no longer in your court and worse you know it.

 

Naz_Nomad wrote:

The most disheartening thing for me is that the emerging stories of future years are happening right now and if left to the MSM nothing would happen.

 

Indeed - well said.

Fossey kate mentions in her book that she was hitting things & broke the bed

I don't know what Burley's intention was with this column, but what she wrote has proved to appeal to 'both sides of the fence' and got everyone talking about it.

Everyone's talking about Burley. Mission accomplished?

I for one thought it was a good article,lots mentioned ,and I am proud to be called a hater if it mean exposing the lies of kate and Gerry McCann(not forgetting the tapas friends)

tiny wrote:I for one thought it was a good article,lots mentioned ,and I am proud to be called a hater if it mean exposing the lies of kate and Gerry McCann(not forgetting the tapas friends)

I'm with you there. I've never heard of Kay, and doubt I'd have even recalled that a UK paper named the Sunday People existed... even if it was a tie-breaker in my local pub quiz!!!, (n.b. I've not had a TV for 4yrs and haven't read a mainstream paper for at least 6... I instead absorb what's going on in the world via the internet's many vibrant, genuinely independent, news channels). I've thus picked up, solely from this site, that most people don't like her, nor like her choice of words, nor (quite understandably) like the politics necessary to get the top of any chosen career... but surely, as you say, what matters is that people are 'talking', and that people are now (who otherwise might not be) looking online into the topic of MBM, and are thus now becoming better acquainted with the key facts. Call me a 'hater', put me in any meaningless category, belittle every atom of my being... as far as I'm concerned it's totally worthwhile, and a minuscule price to pay, if just one single new reader happens to pass by a forum such as this. What's more important? Open debate and the chance for the many very well informed members of this channel to present a non-mainstream perspective... or taking umbridge at an inconsequential five letter word such as 'hater'?