The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Mm11

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Regist10

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Page 6 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by Brian Griffin on 09.09.14 15:16

Just out of interest, is anyone here planning to buy the book?
Brian Griffin
Brian Griffin

Posts : 577
Join date : 2013-10-15

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by nglfi on 09.09.14 15:29

Sometimes I wonder if these things are published just to make people discount them as possibilities, they are written so poorly. Here Summers and Swan are talking about a phenomenon that relates to babies, not 4 year olds. So what relevance does it have? Afaik people don't kidnap children to be 'part of their family' when they are already old enough to remember their real family and to have already developed a personality. Next!
avatar
nglfi

Posts : 563
Join date : 2014-01-09

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by juliet on 09.09.14 15:42

Like Redwood's ridiculously convoluted inquiry, this book is desperately trying to lead the public away from the obvious suspects...the McCanns. The people who had the scent of death all over their flat, their car and her clothes. The people who lied from the first minute about shutters and doors and timelines and checks. Who screamed and roared like bulls and battered walls and beds but later lay in bed without searching for a lost three year old. Who refused to answer questions or comply with requests for reconstructions. Who successfully withheld information about their finances, their health records and their daughter's state of health. And on and on...
juliet
juliet

Posts : 579
Join date : 2011-06-21

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by PeterMac on 09.09.14 15:53

@Brian Griffin wrote:Just out of interest, is anyone here planning to buy the book?
Yes. I have it on order.
My reason ?
I want to find out what happened to Madeleine Beth McCann, on or before 3rd May 2007
and anything written, or any discussion about the few known facts which could possible assist in that is welcome.
Much of what has already been written does not stand up to scrutiny - "madeleine", 'faked abduction' and so on
but one day, someone may write the definitive book and we shall all know.
From the extracts I have seen so far I rather doubt that this book is going to assist, but I do not pre-judge.

I'll let you know !

____________________

PeterMac
PeterMac
Investigator

Posts : 10503
Join date : 2010-12-06

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

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by Guest on 09.09.14 16:02

@BlueBag wrote:
@Okeydokey wrote:It's well known that potential predators  test gates for squeakiness in broad daylight in order to maximise the amount of suspicion surrounding their movements.

Alternatively, people who have to go outside for a smoke, or are waiting for people to join them,  engage in pointless repetitive behaviour on occasion.

Absolutely.

Maybe the gate made an amusing sound or the guy thought "that needs oiling". People do pointless stuff (I do).

Did he have his towels on his feet at this point?
Was that the tree's a rustling or the hinges of the gate.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by jeanmonroe on 09.09.14 16:12

Not such a far fetched 'theory' BG.



"But Gerry and Kate have not TOLD them WHERE she is..."

"They think that maybe she's WITH.."

That 'scenario' would certainly go a long way towards EXPLANING 'WHY' none of the McCann/Healy family members and the T7 did NOT, were not, and are currently NOT 'involved' afaik in ANY 'rigorous SEARCHING' for the 'missing' child, wouldn't it?

'THEY' ALL KNOW where she is, and who she is WITH.

The McCanns CONSTANT "we are WAITING" and their constant "people are 'found' years later" has ALWAYS been a red flag, to me.

Always "WAITING" but NOT ever "SEARCHING"

Why you would the 'family' members and the T7 bother themselves 'searching' when they possibly know EXACTLY where Madeleine "IS or WAS"?

Do they KNOW exactly where Madeleine's "WAITING"?

And that's how they can constantly say "she's come to no HARM"?

And NOW we have S&S er 'mentioning' this as a possible 'explanation'

Do THEY (S&S) also know, KNOW? (where Madeleine 'IS')

As i say, the distinct LACK of 'searching' by the supposedly 'distraught' family members, even when they spent months in PDL, at MW's 'expence', to locate their 'missing' family member, along with the McCann friends seemingly totally disengaged from 'searching' for their friends 'missing' child, as they all said they would, forever, IS a huge RED FLAG for me, personally.

And if DCI Mahogany and the elite Maddie Cops have been 'duped' beyond belief, thats their 'problem' not mine.

I just wouldn't want to be in the McCann/Healy/T7's 'shoes' IF and when the gullible 'donators' to what they thought was a 'search' fund, found out they had been taken for right 'mugs'

Maybe that's why there was a rumour they (the whole chabang, friends and all) were possibly 'doing a runner' to France!  winkwink

The weather's so much better THERE, than say, Ullapool

Anyway.......
avatar
jeanmonroe

Posts : 5818
Join date : 2013-02-07

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty The credibility of Mr Summers

Post by The....truth on 09.09.14 22:45

I have come across this before, but I did not realize it was Summers, until finding it again at Textusa just now.

Tom Mangold, a journalist I would trust gives this reference to the journalism of Summers, from the Independant newspaper:


An opinion about Summers on another case
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/stephen-ward-wasnt-murdered-i-was-there-8990737.html






“Tom Mangold 




Sunday 8 December 2013 




Stephen Ward wasn't murdered. I was there 




Journalism is further discredited by half-baked claims that the osteopath at the centre of the Profumo affair, was killed




Whether Andrew Lloyd Webber's musical which opens next week about the life and death of Stephen Ward succeeds or fails it is a generous gesture for the impresario to use this device as the platform to campaign for a judicial review of the conviction half a century ago of the society osteopath. It was an event which led directly to his suicide. He was at the centre of the Profumo sex and spies scandal which rocked Britain in 1963 when the War minister had an affair with the showgirl Christine Keeler who claimed to be sleeping with a London-based Russian intelligence officer Eugene Ivanov at the same time.




Ward killed himself having been targeted by a vindictive state seeking a scapegoat for Profumo's behaviour; was prosecuted for crimes that it is now generally accepted he did not commit, facing evidence from witnesses who were coerced by police into lying; and pilloried by a hysterical tabloid press.




Fearing contamination, most of his many "friends" deserted him, and British intelligence agencies who had been happy to use him failed to speak up for him in court. Ward was a broken man when he took an overdose of sleeping tablets while staying with one last friend in a flat in Chelsea. I know. I was with him that night.




The anniversary has been celebrated by conspiracy theorists crawling, blinking into the light to announce to stunned newspaper readers the sensational revelation that Stephen Ward "may" have been murdered by MI5. A former colleague of mine from 40 years ago, the author Anthony Summers, a man with some form when it comes to conspiracy theories, has now determined that: "One can see why it may, repeat may, have been necessary to remove Ward from the scene … this was apparently a man with dangerous knowledge … he had inside information of MI5 efforts to manipulate Ivanov and the seamy activities of Establishment figures."




Summers has lent his reputation to a conspiracy theory – please don't giggle – which has an MI5 contract killer hiding in the Chelsea flat all night, then waking the drowsy Ward every few hours and inciting him to take ever increasing overdoses of the sleeping tablets which eventually killed him. The alleged killer is now conveniently dead but allegedly told a gabby friend on his deathbed…




Summers's interviews on this well publicised theory, published by two reputable national newspapers last week, brim with weasel words. "The story ends with a question mark," says Summers darkly. No it doesn't.




It is junk journalism at its very worst, complete piffle, a disgrace to our trade. Believe it if you believe Lord Lucan and Elvis are living under pseudonyms in a mud hut in Uganda. We are in so many ways the first and often the last draft of history; newspaper records and their on-line spill-over really do matter. Lies and rotten journalism go viral in seconds. We really do have a clear compact with our readers, listeners and viewers to get it right.




We are in enough trouble with Leveson and hacking and the shame of neurotic celebrity worship, without allowing so-called investigative journalism reaching "maybe" and "could have" conclusions without a shred of primary source evidence. And even less so when the "revelation" is tied in with a re-hashed book release.




What baffles me is that Summers did not bother to make the two simple "check your facts" phone calls, one to me and one to the other man in the flat that night, the tenant Noel Howard-Jones. They would have brought his loony-tunes theory crashing to the ground. Summers also seems to have forgotten that MI5 and MI6 don't do assassinations. Period. State-sanctioned killings, invariably against major terrorist organisations or well-armed enemies of the state, are done by others. So let me try to set the record straight with some facts.




What did happen on the night of Tuesday 30 July 1963 at Vale Court, 20 Mallord Street, Chelsea? Stephen was overnighting there with his friend Noel Howard-Jones. That evening Stephen called me in the Daily Express newsroom and asked me to come over to Mallord Street. I arrived there about 8.30pm. He was writing what I now know were his suicide notes. A friend Julie Gulliver was in the kitchen cooking dinner. Howard-Jones was out. I stayed with Stephen for several hours during which he gave me the note addressed to me, which regrettably I didn't read till later.




At about 11.35pm, I left him, and he left the flat to drive Julie back to her flat in Bayswater. Howard-Jones returned a few minutes later, and was there to let Ward in on his return at about midnight before going to bed. Ward then continued writing notes including one to Howard-Jones saying "delay resuscitation as long as possible".




There was no MI5 assassin hiding in the flat when Stephen, Julie and I were there; and there was no assassin when Howard-Jones returned. So we can account for the entire evening from 8.45pm to the moment Howard-Jones found Ward unconscious on the living-room divan in the morning. We know, for certain that no MI5 murderer was hiding in the tiny flat. Even the alleged "instrument of murder" – the Nembutal sleeping tablets, were Stephen's own.




Does all this matter – half a century later? Very much so. In a democracy, a free press must be trusted. Once we break down the firewalls between truth and conspiracy theory, once we enter the wilderness of unreality, paranoid fantasy will become our guide. Yes, this stuff sells more papers than the grey truth. But that makes it no less a form of editorial pornography. Don't believe all you read in the press? Sadly true.




Tom Mangold, former senior correspondent for BBC TV's 'Panorama', covered the Profumo Affair for the Daily Express in 1963 “
avatar
The....truth

Posts : 88
Join date : 2014-02-18

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by Okeydokey on 10.09.14 0:52

Thanks for posting the Tom Mangold quote. One of the few journalists I feel has a very good orientation to the truth.

He is essentially accusing Summers of looking to the main chance (as a writer) by avoiding the clear evidence.

So, very relevant to the McCann case.

Summers is in his seventies now. I am not being ageist but we all slow up as the years advance. I do query whether, as a general rule, someone of that age can really get to grips with the mountain of evidence found in the McCann case. There is a reason why most people normally retire before 70, especially if engaged in very extensive and complex investigatory work.

Of course some exceptional people may still be able handle such intellectual burdens. But is there any sign that Summers has? Everything we have heard so far sounds incredibly simplistic in terms of analysis.
avatar
Okeydokey

Posts : 938
Join date : 2013-10-18

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by aquila on 10.09.14 2:52

Perhaps this is a more fitting front cover for the S&S book.

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Z
aquila
aquila

Posts : 9340
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by Guest on 10.09.14 9:37

@aquila wrote:Perhaps this is a more fitting front cover for the S&S book.

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Z

Not bad, but I reckon that what was made out of the other two spare ends would be more appropriate.

I can't wait to not buy this book. I'm really looking forward to not going to Waterstones tomorrow and not getting a copy.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by HelenMeg on 10.09.14 9:41

Clay Regazzoni wrote:
@aquila wrote:Perhaps this is a more fitting front cover for the S&S book.

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Z

Not bad, but I reckon that what was made out of the other two spare ends would be more appropriate.

I can't wait to not buy this book. I'm really looking forward to not going to Waterstones tomorrow and not getting a copy.
I will be glad to join you in not buying the book and not going to Waterstones.
avatar
HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Join date : 2014-01-08

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by Guest on 10.09.14 9:43

@HelenMeg wrote:

I will be glad to join you in not buying the book and not going to Waterstones.

Although, if somebody was to go down there and slip something between the pages of every copy, how would any of that be my fault?

Unless it was me that did it of course.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by jeanmonroe on 10.09.14 10:42

AND JUST WHEN YOU THOUGHT THE IMPECCIBLE 'RESEARCH' INTO MADELEINE'S 'MYSTERIOUS DISAPPEARANCE' COULDN'T GET ANY 'WORSE' WE HAVE THIS!

"Only days before Madeleine went missing on 9 May 2007, a man was twice spotted in close vicinity to apartment 5A of the Ocean Club, where the McCanns were staying on holiday"

'MISSING' ON THE 9TH (NINTH) of MAY. 2007!

So, 6 (SIX) days AFTER another child had 'mysteriously disappeared' from an apartment in PDL, Portugal!

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/madeleine-mccann-vanished-mystery-man-spied-her-ocean-163111555.html#Icbc3TN

"reporting' on this 'case' just gets better and better, dosen't it?...........................DUH!

However,

the 'good' news is that, in PRINT:  "Metropolitan Police officers are leading the investigation into the McCann case and this week faced criticism over the organisation of the inquiry, which allegedly hampered progress."

Strange, isn't it? That OG/MET/BHH have NOT 'reacted' to, or, MORE IMPORTINGLY, have disputed, this 'claim' that the MET Police and 9 'other' UK 'agencies' HAMPERED, thus HARMED, the investigation, into a child's 'disappearance', from day 1.
avatar
jeanmonroe

Posts : 5818
Join date : 2013-02-07

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by HelenMeg on 10.09.14 10:47

The girl (Tasmin) who saw the man staring intently at the Apartment used by the McCanns made a statement - ref MCCANNFILES-

Read it - see what you think....

taken from Mc Cannfiles PJ statements

Deposition of 12-year-old girl according to case files

Deposition of T. M. S., aged 12, a resident in Luz, on the 9th of May 2007, 4 p.m.
Page 800-804, volume III of process 201/07.0GALGS

"Comes to the process as a witness. Understands the Portuguese Language, as she has been living in Portugal since the age of two months (approximately eleven years ago). Still, an interpreter is present [name withheld].

Her parents are separated, she initially resided in Monchique, and now in Praia da Luz, since 2005, at the address that is stated above, with her Mother.

She also mentions that she lived in the apartment where the missing child was staying, that belonged to her Grandmother, who is already deceased. That she didn't actually reside there, but spent extensive and repeated periods of time there, with her Grandmother and her Mother. The apartment was bought in 1994 and sold in 2002 and therefore she knows it perfectly, both from the inside and from the outside.

She wishes to clarify. On the 30th of April, Monday, at around 8 a.m. and when she was walking to the bus stop for the school bus that leaves at 8.15, a path that she walks every day when there is school, she noticed the presence of a male individual, at the back of Madeleine's house, on a little pathway to the apartments that exists there, looking in an ostensive manner at the house's balcony. This happened when she was walking down the street, on the left side, which was right in front of the balcony, and the distance between them was the width of the road. That when she was walking down she decided to look at the pathway, because as she lived there, she likes to watch the house and the neighbouring garden. She walked with her mother, that she is certain she didn't see the man, and she was walking two dogs on a leash, which forced them to cross the road, a bit further down. At that moment she saw the man more closely, as they crossed the road, and then lost visual angle when they finished crossing.

Says that the man didn't see the deponent, because he was staring at the balcony.

She presumes that nobody was on Madeleine's house's balcony, but she cannot state it beyond doubt.

After crossing, she caught the bus and went to school and her mother went on the beach to walk the dogs.

When she returned from school, at around 5.30/5.40 p.m., after leaving the bus, she walked a different path, because the bus has a stop on the street where she lives, and therefore she doesn't need to walk down to the 'Ocean Club'. She didn't see the man again at that time, nor did she see him again until the 2nd of May, Wednesday, after the bank holiday.

That on that day she didn't go to school because she was sick with an infection in her right ear. Still, and feeling somewhat better, at around noon she left on her own, as her mother was at work, with the dogs, and went to the 'Alisuper' supermarket which is located on a perpendicular to Rua Direita, where she bought chocolates for €3,63. Then she walked to the pharmacy, which is located below the 'Baptista' supermarket, on a lateral perspective, where she bought a box of earplugs, to prevent water from getting in, and spent €4,55. Then she went to 'Baptista' supermarket to buy cereal bread, because they don't sell it at 'Alisuper'. She left the dogs tied at the back entrance of 'Baptista' and went in to buy the bread. She paid, left 'Baptista', collected the dogs, and walked across the supermarket's hall to the main entrance, approximately four/five metres, which exits to the street where she had seen the man. She started walking up the street on the left side going up, and saw the man, this time in front of the 'Ocean Club's' reception, once more looking at Madeleine's house in an ostensive manner, where he stood he could observe, she thinks, the house's two side windows and part of the balcony. She thinks that he could also be looking at the other residences that are located in the same direction.

That as she was walking up she walked right in front of the man, and observed him directly, an action that he did not retaliate, because he never looked at the deponent. The distance that she observed him from was the width of the road.

After walking by the individual, she walked towards her house, through the road to the right, and never looked back to the man, or turned around to observe him better.

After that day she never saw him again.

As she said before, she left home at 12 p.m. and returned at 12.35 p.m., which means she crossed with the man at around 12.25/12.28 (the rest of the walk takes about seven minutes).

On the next day, Thursday (0.305.2007) she walked the same path as on the 30th, at the same time, but didn't see the man, and never saw him again, as she said before.

Concerning the individual, she describes him as being: Caucasian race, light skin, so he wasn't Portuguese, but could be British, according to her criteria. Approximately 180 cm tall, thin complexion, 30/35 years of age. Short hair, like shaved with 1 cm of length and fair, but she isn't sure if it was blonde because the sun was reflecting, and made perception more difficult. She didn't see the eyes because he wore dark glasses of black colour, with a structure of mass, a thick frame. He had a large forehead. Nose of normal size, a bit pointy and sharp. Large ears, close against the head. Mouth with thin lips, she didn't see his teeth. Chin pointing up, which stood out on a face that she describes as sharp. No beard, no moustache, a clean shave. No other special signs, apart from some small pimples on the face as a result of shaving. He looked ugly, even 'disgusting'.

The first time that she saw him he was wearing a sports style jacket of thin black leather, with a zipper and several pockets also with similar zippers, in silver. She saw no label or inscription. The jacket was open, therefore she saw a white t-shirt, with a dark blue label near the waist, which she cannot identify very well.

Trousers, she thinks, of blue jeans, worn out. Sports shoes (trainers) in black and grey, with a wave, maybe 'Nike' in a colour that she can't remember.

The second time, he wore the same jacket, this time zipped up, because the day was colder than the first one, windy. She didn't notice the rest of the clothing. She says that on that day he had a pen with a string attached to one of his pockets.

The first time, he was leaning against the wall against his hands, and the second time, he had his hands in his pockets.

She never saw him with any photo camera, or any mobile phone, although the second time, he might have a device in his pocket, which she detected by the shape.

When asked, she says that she saw no vehicle near the man, only a few vehicles, but near the 'Baptista'.

When asked she says that she saw Madeleine once, on a day that she cannot indicate, on the balcony where the man was staring at, the first time. She even waved at her because it was a small child, in a caring gesture.

A map of the area is added, where A is the spot of the first sighting and B the spot for the second one. The 'Baptista' supermarket and Madeleine's apartment.

She said that she can recognise the man both personally and photographically, and create a photofit.

Therefore I interrupt the present deposition and show the deponent photographs of individuals with similar characteristics.

I resume the deposition where it is consigned that the diligence resulted negatively, according to a report that is annexed.

She didn't say anything further. The deposition is read and approved, ratified and signed together with the interpreter that assisted.

The present deposition is written and signed."
avatar
HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Join date : 2014-01-08

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by HelenMeg on 10.09.14 10:49

For me, at least, there are a few things that dont add up about that statement
avatar
HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Join date : 2014-01-08

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by PeterMac on 10.09.14 11:02

Clay Regazzoni wrote:
@aquila wrote:Perhaps this is a more fitting front cover for the S&S book.

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Z

Not bad, but I reckon that what was made out of the other two spare ends would be more appropriate.
Clarence Mitchell ?
PeterMac
PeterMac
Investigator

Posts : 10503
Join date : 2010-12-06

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

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by BlueBag on 10.09.14 11:05

One of the Tapas men?

Could be anyone and completely innocent.
BlueBag
BlueBag

Posts : 4965
Join date : 2014-06-06

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by jeanmonroe on 10.09.14 11:21

Mr Summers said: "Had there been a warning note in the apartment, do we think the McCanns would have left the patio door unlocked on the night they went to the other side of the pool to have dinner away from their children?

"One would be tempted to think they would make sure everything was firmly locked up."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

My question would be:

IF the McCanns had KNOWN that MW, OC, PDL, was 'crawling' with 'predatory paedophiles, burglators, dodgy geezers in sun glasses, long haired, short haired men, dodgy 'mummy's (sic) baby snatching gypsies, staring 'ugly' men, bogus charidy collectors, dodgy squeaky gate 'checkers', smelly pot bellied kiddie 'fiddlers', weirdo's walking about with surgical masks on with laundry wrapped around their legs and feet', etc.,

WOULD THE SAINTLY RESPONSIBLE LOVING PARENTS, THE MCCANN'S, WITH THREE BABIES, AND ALL THEIR FRIENDS ALSO WITH CHILDREN, HAVE EVER BEEN 'TEMPTED' AT ALL, TO HAVE CHOSEN TO HOLIDAY IN SUCH A 'VILE, HIDEOUS' PLACE?

I WONDER WHY DP DIDN'T TELL THE MCCANNS WHAT TO 'EXPECT' WHEN HE SUGGESTED THEY ALL GO, FOR A LOVELY 'INCREDIBLY SAFE' HOLIDAY TO MW, OC, PDL?  thinking

And we know all about ALL the 'dodgy' characters that 'frequented' the MW, OC, in PDL, in April-May 2007, because DCI Mahogany and elite OG Maddie Cops, have spent YEARS telling the world 'it's all true'!
---------------------------------
"another nail in the coffin" for MW's OC, PDL 'banged in' by S&S?

It really does appear, to me, that the MET, McCanns, S&S etc, will NEVER be 'satisfied' UNTIL MW, OC in PDL is CLOSED down FOREVER.

Sacked staff?= "collateral damage', like the McCann sycophantic 'supporters' from Cameron/May/Miliband down, give a fcuking toss, anyway!
avatar
jeanmonroe

Posts : 5818
Join date : 2013-02-07

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by aquila on 10.09.14 11:47

@jeanmonroe

Snipped from the Sun on Sunday 7th September 2014

A two year study by investigative writers Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan concluded:

"Had Gerry and Kate McCann known of the history of sexual assaults on tourists' children, they would surely not have left their patio doors unlocked to make checks on their children easier.

Burglary epidemic

"Had they known about the sex attacks in advance of the holiday, indeed, they might well not have chosen to travel to the Algarve."
aquila
aquila

Posts : 9340
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by Stillthinking on 10.09.14 12:07

Hi,

I'm new to the forum though not new to following the case, having followed it online in the early days and when the files were released. I've just began to follow it again more recently and reading about the man checking the gate has triggered a memory .

Now forgive me but I can't remember if I saw this being discussed online years ago or if I just thought it as I was reading discussions. Did the "gateman" sighting not tie up with something either Matt or Russel had said in the files  about their younger child having a nap in their apartment during the day and them leaving through the front gate?
avatar
Stillthinking

Posts : 151
Join date : 2014-09-10

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by Rogue-a-Tory on 10.09.14 12:27

The abductor was masked, bound head to toe in towels and bandages. Just what are the authors trying to say? That the mummy did it? big grin
Rogue-a-Tory
Rogue-a-Tory

Posts : 615
Join date : 2014-09-10

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by jeanmonroe on 10.09.14 12:36

Welcome to you Justthinking friends

Answer to your question

Don't know laughat

However, Does anyone KNOW IF S&S have used the 'A' words (Abducted/Abduction) in relation to their 'extensive research', in their 'interviews' to date?

From the 'snippets', so far 'published', it appears they HAVE NOT!

They say 'missing' 'vanished' 'disappeared' BUT no 'Madeleine McCann WAS abducted' or no 'Madeleine McCann WAS involved in an abduction'

Why are the authors, S&S, so erm 'reticent', if they are, but certainly appear to be, to support the 'abduction' thesis, as related to the whole world, by the 'distraught' parents, the McCanns?

Bound to be the 'A' words in their book somewhere, SURELY. winkwink
avatar
jeanmonroe

Posts : 5818
Join date : 2013-02-07

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by jeanmonroe on 10.09.14 12:51

@Rogue-a-Tory wrote:The abductor was masked, bound head to toe in towels and bandages. Just what are the authors trying to say? That the mummy did it? big grin

Depending on the 'state' of the erm, body, 'mummy' had to possibly 'move', i am sure she'd wear a 'surgical mask' if the 'body' had started to er, smell, like a cadavar does, and foot 'coveralls' laughat

The 'mummy' wouldn't want 'blood' traces spoiling the look of her new holiday gladiator sandals trainers, would she?

Perhaps THIS is the very 'SHE' (may strike again) GM alluded to outside the Lisbon Courtroom, in July. winkwink

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-libel-trial-kate-3828366

he or she or they may strike again," he said.

Interesting this 'snippet'

Kate and Gerry say ex cop Goncalo Amaral's book has done "severe damage" to the search for their daughter

Completely 'forgetting' to mention the 'severe damage' that 10 (TEN) UK 'agencies' DID, by 'hampering, ergo harming' the investigation, from day 1, into their daughter's 'disappearance', as espoused by the ex CEO of one of those agencies, CEOP, Jim Gamble.
The 'severe damage' to the investigation done by TEN UK 'agencies' trying desperately to 'outdo' each other.

"Damages" WRITS in the post to ALL of those HAMPERING, HARMFUL, UNHELPFUL, United Kingdom 'agencies' Mr and Mrs McCann?

Hmmmm.

thinking

THOUGHT NOT!
avatar
jeanmonroe

Posts : 5818
Join date : 2013-02-07

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by PeterMac on 10.09.14 12:52

@Rogue-a-Tory wrote:The abductor was masked, bound head to toe in towels and bandages. Just what are the authors trying to say? That the mummy did it? big grin

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 <a href=Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Boris11" />

____________________

PeterMac
PeterMac
Investigator

Posts : 10503
Join date : 2010-12-06

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

Back to top Go down

Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator" - Page 6 Empty Re: Here we go! "Madeleine: Book Sheds Light On Mystery Predator"

Post by Stillthinking on 10.09.14 13:01

Ty Jeanmonroe :)

I've had  a look through the rog interviews to see if I could find the bit about one of the kids napping around the time of the sighting and Matt leaving through the gate. Closest I can find is in Matt's

"she'd sleep half twelve to sort of one o'clock and if we were upstairs eating with Dave and Fiona, as we did much more towards the end of the week, erm, then she'd maybe sleep 'til half past three "

and

"during the day, if somebody was in the apartment, erm, we'd go back through the patio doors, we'd just leave them open, you know"

and Rachel's

"we’d take Grace down for a sleep and you know, so she was generally sleeping between two and four there"

and on the 3rd

"we went back up and Grace was still asleep I think, so was Evie, erm so Matt and Russell went down to the beach to go sailing and you know, Jane and I said we’d get the kids up and then we’d head down to the beach when they were up, erm and then I think we ended up going down to the beach perhaps about, must have been about four, half four,"

So it does look like around the time of the gateman sighting, Matt's youngest child was sleeping, Rachel stayed with her while he left to go to the beach, presumably through the open patio doors and then gate.

Just a minor thing but it was bugging me lol
avatar
Stillthinking

Posts : 151
Join date : 2014-09-10

Back to top Go down

Page 6 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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