Re: Sunglasses - Bizarre

by j.rob 01.12.14 15:02

Monty Heck wrote:This is taken from the book. [edited]
" On Tuesday 1 May, . . . In the afternoon Gerry and I decided to take the children down to the beach. To be honest, I think they’d have been just as happy to go back to their clubs, but we wanted to do something slightly different with them, just the five of us. We borrowed a double buggy from Mark Warner to make the walk easier for Sean and Amelie. The weather wasn’t great: in fact, on the beach it started to rain. A bit of rain is not something that bothers a Scotsman like Gerry, but Sean and Amelie didn’t like the feel of the wet sand and insisted, in the way two-year-olds do, on being carried.

So, it's overcast, the children seem content to go back to their clubs, yet this of all days the one to borrow a double buggy and take a trip to the beach. A buggy which would have been tricky to manoeuvre on PDL beach whilst carrying a toddler apiece, with a third child in tow. Strange M didn't also give her parents her tuppence worth regarding the wet sand or the rain, considering that family members said she had plenty to say for a child of her age, and if K was racking her brains to remember every detail, why does she only recall the reaction of her children who were lacking in the speech department? Agree it seems an odd thing to be buying sunglasses on the way back from a beach you've just had to leave because of rain. Or to recall such a detail when one appears to have remembered nothing at all about what was said or done during this episode by the child who went missing. Odd for a small child to have nothing memorable to say on a trip to the beach, whether it rained or not. A curious silence or simply not worth noting?

Bet this beach visit never happened. Or at least not with all FIVE of them including Madeleine. I think something had happened to Madeleine by Tuesday. Hence the need to over-egg events and activities on Tuesday. Madeleine looking gorgeous on the mini-tennis court clutching tennis balls or a type which are not used for children's mini-tennis. The dodgy tennis balls photo. Choosing to go to the beach when the weather is bad. When your children are not enthusiastic - they would have been just as happy to go back to their clubs, according to Kate.

Pretty much everything she writes, imo, is either a downright lie or nonsensical. Why take children to the beach when it is raining and they would be just as happy going to their clubs?

This is all deliberate deception, as always. Look this way not that way. The trouble is, she does it so badly as, in her intense efforts to deceive, she often makes no sense at all. That's how it looks to me anyway.

by **PeterMac** 01.12.14 15:25

j.rob wrote:
This is all deliberate deception, as always. Look this way not that way. The trouble is, she does it so badly as, in her intense efforts to deceive, she often makes no sense at all. That's how it looks to me anyway.

Quite so.
None of it makes any sense.
In fact the dogs are the only things which do.

by j.rob 01.12.14 15:28

Ah, just re-read the whole thread and can see that my last post is pretty much redundant. But WHAT were the McCanns REALLY doing on Tuesday??? This is the million dollar question? My gut feeling is that this may have been the day that Madeleine was removed from apartment 5A (assuming she was ever in that apartment in the first place - there were so few signs of her DNA). Maybe removed on Tuesday and I would have thought almost certainly by Wednesday. Presumably, if there is any credence in the substitute story, on these days Gerry would sign in another child instead of Madeleine. (And I do agree that the creche signatures are remarkably similar.)

It all seems like such a crazy plan. But The Joker likes games and riddles, imo. He likes hoodwinking people and creating drama.

by missbeetle 10.12.14 20:09

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Another sunglasses close-up.

Kate looks like a Hollywood bird and Gerry remarkably like a Tom Cruiser.

My opinion only.

by ultimaThule 10.12.14 21:41

Gezza looks like Tom Cruise? With a nose like that, missb? nah

As fpr Kate looking like a Hollywood bird, would that be the Common Loon?

by missbeetle 10.12.14 22:12

ultimaThule wrote:Gezza looks like Tom Cruise? With a nose like that, missb?

As fpr Kate looking like a Hollywood bird, would that be the Common Loon?

Hello ultimaThule -

Mr Mapother IV is, alas, no stranger to the art of surgical nose refinement.

Here's a picture of him showing Hollywood love to a soft toy -

- whilst showing off his Tippex veneers.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
(undated photograph snipped from Bing images)

Bit of a honker there I'd say?

Good call on the Common Loon. It is the provincial bird of Ontario -

- would not Rev Hubbard hear its woeful cry in his Canadian countryside?

Worth a listen :

My thoughts only.

by Guest 10.12.14 23:59

missbeetle wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
(undated photograph snipped from Bing images)

Jeez, the fella looks like his own waxwork, but I guess that's Hollywood for you!

by Gaggzy 11.12.14 0:31

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

'Watch out. This thing's got teeth that could chew through a washing line in three seconds flat,' the rabbit said.

by ultimaThule 11.12.14 2:43

missbeetle wrote:
ultimaThule wrote:Gezza looks like Tom Cruise? With a nose like that, missb?

As fpr Kate looking like a Hollywood bird, would that be the Common Loon?

Hello ultimaThule -

Mr Mapother IV is, alas, no stranger to the art of surgical nose refinement.

Here's a picture of him showing Hollywood love to a soft toy -

- whilst showing off his Tippex veneers.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
(undated photograph snipped from Bing images)

Bit of a honker there I'd say?

Good call on the Common Loon. It is the provincial bird of Ontario -

- would not Rev Hubbard hear its woeful cry in his Canadian countryside?

Worth a listen :

My thoughts only.

Cute pic of Tom with Cuddlebunny before his comforter was audited, missb, and at least Mr Mapother IV appears to have a genuine smile on his face, unlike the look of sneering derision which is a distinctive feature of the anti~~Christ~~hero.

In my earlier post I likened Kate to the Common Loon and now wish to amend this analogy to her resembling the common loon who can be found falling out of bars and clubs in the early hours.

As for the melodic but haunting call of the bird, as with so many of those who are of a religious persusion I suspect that Father Hubbard hears only what he wants to hear.

by missbeetle 08.03.15 20:04

Another sunglasses picture I don't recall having seen before :

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]"

by suzyjohnson 09.03.15 2:46

IMO the sad thing about the Tuesday afternoon beach story is that all afternoon, turns out, in reality, to be less than 2 hours. A bit like the outing on the first evening to the Millenium restaurant, when they decided they weren't going to do that again.

by missbeetle 08.09.15 5:33

Another interesting picture of Gerald P McCann's mysterious sunglasses :

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
(dated 6th July, 2007)

What a bad-tempered and thuggish-faced man...

...close-up, he looks to have been given the bash -

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

My observation only.

by **sharonl** 08.09.15 7:20

suzyjohnson wrote:IMO the sad thing about the Tuesday afternoon beach story is that all afternoon, turns out, in reality, to be less than 2 hours. A bit like the outing on the first evening to the Millenium restaurant, when they decided they weren't going to do that again.

The children were back at the crèche by 2.30 having been collected at 12.30, they had lunch in between. Did that trip to the beach really take place? Did the McCanns take the kids with them? Did they really take a hired buggy?

by **PeterMac** 08.09.15 8:00

sharonl wrote:
suzyjohnson wrote:IMO the sad thing about the Tuesday afternoon beach story is that all afternoon, turns out, in reality, to be less than 2 hours. A bit like the outing on the first evening to the Millenium restaurant, when they decided they weren't going to do that again.

The children were back at the crèche by 2.30 having been collected at 12.30, they had lunch in between.
Did that trip to the beach really take place? Did the McCanns take the kids with them? Probably not. It is in the book merely as a "Version" of the truth - not The Truth
Did they really take a hired buggy? Unlikely

by DaTroof 08.09.15 10:21

Creche records (assuming they are accurate) suggest beach trip was Monday not Tuesday. On Tuesday Madeleine was signed out at 12.20 & signed back into creche at 14.30 leaving only 2hrs total for lunch & the beach trip. On Monday Madeleine was signed out of the creche at 12.10 & returned to the creche at 15.15 that day, leaving about three hours for lunch & the trip to the beach. This also fits with the creche timetable for the week which has a mini tennis session on Monday morning. Kate describes Madeleine playing tennis on the morning of the day they went to the beach.

If the beach trip was on Tuesday lunch & getting ready to leave would take the best part of an hour & the walk to & from the beach with three small children & buggie(s) at least 15 minutes each way that leaves a maximum of about an hour and a half at the beach. Not a long time, but perhaps just long enough for Kate's account to be true. Kate does not actually mention having lunch at all on the day of the beach trip, but it does not seem likely that they did not give their children at least something to eat before setting off for the beach.

Of course this leaves one big, no, HUGE question: Why did Kate get the day of the beach trip wrong in her book?

I cannot accept that she was simply muddled about which day this occurred.

by Guest 08.09.15 10:26

DaTroof wrote:I cannot accept that she was simply muddled about which day this occurred.

Especially as she had the PJ files with the creche records available.

by HelenMeg 08.09.15 10:35

DaTroof wrote:Creche records (assuming they are accurate) suggest beach trip was Monday not Tuesday. On Tuesday Madeleine was signed out at 12.20 & signed back into creche at 14.30 leaving only 2hrs total for lunch & the beach trip. On Monday Madeleine was signed out of the creche at 12.10 & returned to the creche at 15.15 that day, leaving about three hours for lunch & the trip to the beach. This also fits with the creche timetable for the week which has a mini tennis session on Monday morning. Kate describes Madeleine playing tennis on the morning of the day they went to the beach.

If the beach trip was on Tuesday lunch & getting ready to leave would take the best part of an hour & the walk to & from the beach with three small children & buggie(s) at least 15 minutes each way that leaves a maximum of about an hour and a half at the beach. Not a long time, but perhaps just long enough for Kate's account to be true. Kate does not actually mention having lunch at all on the day of the beach trip, but it does not seem likely that they did not give their children at least something to eat before setting off for the beach.

Of course this leaves one big, no, HUGE question: Why did Kate get the day of the beach trip wrong in her book?

I cannot accept that she was simply muddled about which day this occurred.

Rather assume the creche records were NOT accurate. For a reasoned explanation as to why, please read this - (see 2. Creche Sheets) - you will see that the creche sheets cannot be assumed accurate:
http://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/3-penguins-in-desert.html

by DaTroof 08.09.15 11:33

I have read a lot about the creche records & studied them myself.

Clearly they are not perfect records of entry & exit from the creche at O.C. However they are exactly the sort of documents one would expect to find: missing signatures, crossings out, missing dates etc. I see nothing sinister in any of these things. I have kept similar sorts of records in the past and they always contain this sort of thing.

The supposed entry for Madelene McCann with the "i" missing is nothing of the sort, the "i" is there just badly written & I am not convinced by suggestions that Gerry or Kate McCann signed other children in or out of the creche.

There are some curious anomalies with regard to Madeleine McCann on Tuesday 1st May & Wednesday 2nd May. On 1st May afternoon she was not signed out at all. On 2nd May he was signed out by Cat Nanny at 12.30. This is the only occasion on which Madeleine was signed out by a nanny although there are several occasions when other children were signed out by Cat nanny. Most intriguingly she was signed out in the afternoon by KMHealy while on every other occasion Kate signed the register it was as KMcCann. How these anomalies connect to Madeleine's disappearance, if at all, is impossible to say for certain, but they might indicate that all was not well with Madeleine McCann from Tuesday afternoon through Wednesday.