The McCann's planned abduction went wrong?

by j.rob 18.02.14 12:26

If one is to explore a hypothesis that the McCanns pre-planned a faked abduction of their daughter, to what degree, if any, did the plan go wrong? What was the nature of the 'disaster' that Gerry referred to on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance?

Given the timelines of the night of the alleged abduction with eye-witness reports that a commotion was heard as early as 9.20pm with news that a child had gone missing, whereas Kate in her book claims it was 10pm when she raised the alarm. And given that the shutters were not broken or 'jemmied' despite relatives at home claiming that they were - and no evidence that they had been.

To what degree did the plan go wrong, if we are to explore this avenue?

by Cristobell 18.02.14 12:48

j.rob wrote:If one is to explore a hypothesis that the McCanns pre-planned a faked abduction of their daughter, to what degree, if any, did the plan go wrong? What was the nature of the 'disaster' that Gerry referred to on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance?

Given the timelines of the night of the alleged abduction with eye-witness reports that a commotion was heard as early as 9.20pm with news that a child had gone missing, whereas Kate in her book claims it was 10pm when she raised the alarm. And given that the shutters were not broken or 'jemmied' despite relatives at home claiming that they were - and no evidence that they had been.

To what degree did the plan go wrong, if we are to explore this avenue?

I've always thought because the story was so badly told that it was made up 'on the hop' - not premeditated, especially the sighting by Jane Tanner.

I believe the 'disaster' Gerry referred to, was the death of the child. The word 'disaster' doesn't fit a child missing from her bed scenario, even if there is an open window. Maddie is missing would have been far more accurate. The word 'disaster' is so final and completely out of context.

As for how it all went wrong, bumping into Jez Wilkins probably threw a spanner in the works, but not one nearly so big as bumping into the Smith family on their way back from dinner. I believe that is why, even today, they are clinging onto Tannerman - he provides Gerry with an alibi.

by marconi 18.02.14 14:02

I would advise to consult Wikipedia free encyclopedy where one can find the explanation of the word disastre.

by Guest 18.02.14 14:19

I speculate the commotion started way too early.
At around 9:20 pm clamour at the restaurant about the disappeared child.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ARLINDO-PELEGA.htm

Following the disaster of the receptionist calling the police, way before Gerry, "at around 10:03 pm" told Kate to go check on the kids, as Gerry claimed as a witness.
Receptionist: http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/HELDER_LUIS.htm

The member of staff who told the reception to phone the police, said in his statement that it was before 9:40 pm. Can't remember the name and right now I haven't got the time to read through it all to look it up.

Hadn't I also read somewhere the parents did not carry mobile phones nor watches? Somebody simply screwed up the execution of the plan by timing really bad. Imo. Dunno.

by ultimaThule 18.02.14 14:52

j.rob wrote:If one is to explore a hypothesis that the McCanns pre-planned a faked abduction of their daughter, to what degree, if any, did the plan go wrong? What was the nature of the 'disaster' that Gerry referred to on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance?

Given the timelines of the night of the alleged abduction with eye-witness reports that a commotion was heard as early as 9.20pm with news that a child had gone missing, whereas Kate in her book claims it was 10pm when she raised the alarm. And given that the shutters were not broken or 'jemmied' despite relatives at home claiming that they were - and no evidence that they had been.

To what degree did the plan go wrong, if we are to explore this avenue?

The 'disaster' was occasioned by an accomplice in the UK failing to know or realise that Portugal is not an hour ahead of UK time.

Kick-off in the UK was due to start at around midnight with a call to the Foreign Office requesting urgent help for relatives or friends whose child had been abducted and the Portuguese police were doing little about it, but whoever made the call did so before 11pm thus ensuring that (as far as I recall) the British consul in Portimao was aware of the event before the GNR, who received their first call at c10.47pm, were able to arrive at the scene.

by j.rob 18.02.14 15:46

All of the above make some sense in understanding how the timings went awry. Although the one hour time difference is such a fundamental mistake. The other thing that strikes me is was it intended for Madeleine to be abducted when she was alive and well (even if sedated, to keep her quiet)?

If you look at the Shannon Mathews case, there was a faked abduction staged for financial reasons and Shannon was later found alive and well. The adults responsible got off with relatively short prison sentences, presumably partly because Shannon had come to no (obvious) harm.

What about if that had been the original intention (and there are so many indications of pre-meditation) but that something went wrong and Madeleine had an accident/injury/overdose/adverse reaction to drugs/was molested/struck in a non-premeditation fit of anger etc) so that what had intended to be the faked abduction of a very much alive Madeleine turned into the faked abduction of a dead or dying or molested Madeleine?

This would have complicated things considerably and could, possibly, have been the 'disaster' that Gerry was referring to. The McCann's had no option but to stick with the random mystery paedophile abductor theory, even though the turn of events had conspired to turn a crazy hoax (designed to bring fame, fortune and celebrity) into a very dark homicide case?

Perhaps there had been a plan for Madeleine to 'disappear' for a period of time - keeping the papers full of stories of sightings and keeping the fund money rolling in. Then, when the public got bored of the story and sympathy turned into criticism (which is what has happened now) Hey Presto! Madeleine is found! The story has a happy ending and continues to fill newspapers for years to come.

It sounds crazy but so do most things in relation to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. The faked abduction of an alive and well Madeleine allows for more possibilities, justifies (in its own distorted way) the existence of a fund and could justify (again in its own perverted way) a long-term campaign.

by ultimaThule 18.02.14 16:13

We're not talking about a conspiracy involving pharmaceutical companies, big business interests, high ranking government officials, MI5, and the like which necessitated a cover up because, if that were the case, the chances are the world would not have heard of Madeleine McCann.

Nor are we talking about a criminal plan inspired by a mastermind with a brilliant intellect because the wee one has a distinctly average iq.

What we are talking about is a bunch of amateurs who got lucky, initially by default and then by the calculated design of spin merchants and others of their ilk paid from monies which were donated by the gullible public of numerous countries in the belief these sums would be used to find a missing child.

by mysterion 18.02.14 16:20

The mastermind does not need to be GM.

by Cristobell 18.02.14 16:23

ultimaThule wrote:We're not talking about a conspiracy involving pharmaceutical companies, big business interests, high ranking government officials, MI5, and the like which necessitated a cover up because, if that were the case, the chances are the world would not have heard of Madeleine McCann.

Nor are we talking about a criminal plan inspired by a mastermind with a brilliant intellect because the wee one has a distinctly average iq.

What we are talking about is a bunch of amateurs who got lucky, initially by default and then by the calculated design of spin merchants and others of their ilk paid from monies which were donated by the gullible public of numerous countries in the belief these sums would be used to find a missing child.

Well said!

by j.rob 18.02.14 17:01

I suppose you can take the man out of the Glasgow tenement but you cannot necessarily take the Glasgow tenement out of the man.

(No offence intended to those people who have lived in Glasgow tenements. I might equally have written the same thing about someone growing up in a palace or a two-bedroom semi in Surbiton ). big grin

by travis macbickle 18.02.14 17:42

j.rob wrote:I suppose you can take the man out of the Glasgow tenement but you cannot necessarily take the Glasgow tenement out of the man.

(No offence intended to those people who have lived in Glasgow tenements. I might equally have written the same thing about someone growing up in a palace or a two-bedroom semi in Surbiton ).

cheap comment j.rob

by j.rob 18.02.14 18:02

Not at all. Do you deny that we are not all, to some extent, products of our upbringing over which we have very little control indeed (our upbringings, I mean). How we chose to interpret this and what behaviours and attitudes we adopt when we are adults is quite another matter.

As for below-the-belt comments, these feature heavily within the pages of Kate McCann's book.

How a mother can believe that there is 'no evidence whatsoever to suggest that Madeleine has come to any harm' when the parents claim to KNOW that their daughter was snatched out of her bed (and probably by a paedophile ring) s beyond comprehension.

But then most things that the McCanns say are.

by Guest 18.02.14 18:10

ultimaThule wrote:
j.rob wrote:If one is to explore a hypothesis that the McCanns pre-planned a faked abduction of their daughter, to what degree, if any, did the plan go wrong? What was the nature of the 'disaster' that Gerry referred to on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance?

Given the timelines of the night of the alleged abduction with eye-witness reports that a commotion was heard as early as 9.20pm with news that a child had gone missing, whereas Kate in her book claims it was 10pm when she raised the alarm. And given that the shutters were not broken or 'jemmied' despite relatives at home claiming that they were - and no evidence that they had been.

To what degree did the plan go wrong, if we are to explore this avenue?
The 'disaster' was occasioned by an accomplice in the UK failing to know or realise that Portugal is not an hour ahead of UK time.

Kick-off in the UK was due to start at around midnight with a call to the Foreign Office requesting urgent help for relatives or friends whose child had been abducted and the Portuguese police were doing little about it, but whoever made the call did so before 11pm thus ensuring that (as far as I recall) the British consul in Portimao was aware of the event before the GNR, who received their first call at c10.47pm, were able to arrive at the scene.

by Guest 18.02.14 18:17

If it's speculation galore anyway, maybe the parents put Maddie up for illegal adoption, in effect sold the kid, and tried to extort more money from the buyers. They threatened to call the police and cry abduction, so the buyers threatened to kill Maddie.
To get the money, the parents cried abduction and got a dead child afterwards.
So, no money and a dead child delivered outside on the flower bed by the window. Disaster!

Far fetched, I know.

by ultimaThule 18.02.14 18:33

travis macbickle wrote:
j.rob wrote:I suppose you can take the man out of the Glasgow tenement but you cannot necessarily take the Glasgow tenement out of the man.

(No offence intended to those people who have lived in Glasgow tenements. I might equally have written the same thing about someone growing up in a palace or a two-bedroom semi in Surbiton ).
cheap comment j.rob

On the contrary, it's a valid comment made using a phrase which, with geographic adaptation, is commonly used to denote those whose upward social mobility has failed to bring about any commeasurate alteration in their manners

by travis macbickle 18.02.14 18:40

ultimaThule wrote:
travis macbickle wrote:
j.rob wrote:I suppose you can take the man out of the Glasgow tenement but you cannot necessarily take the Glasgow tenement out of the man.

(No offence intended to those people who have lived in Glasgow tenements. I might equally have written the same thing about someone growing up in a palace or a two-bedroom semi in Surbiton ).
cheap comment j.rob
On the contrary, it's a valid comment made using a phrase which, with geographic adaptation, is commonly used to denote those whose upward social mobility has failed to bring about any commeasurate alteration in their manners

ireland,s shame ,scotland,s burden

by ultimaThule 18.02.14 18:42

travis macbickle wrote:
ultimaThule wrote:
travis macbickle wrote:
j.rob wrote:I suppose you can take the man out of the Glasgow tenement but you cannot necessarily take the Glasgow tenement out of the man.

(No offence intended to those people who have lived in Glasgow tenements. I might equally have written the same thing about someone growing up in a palace or a two-bedroom semi in Surbiton ).
cheap comment j.rob
On the contrary, it's a valid comment made using a phrase which, with geographic adaptation, is commonly used to denote those whose upward social mobility has failed to bring about any commeasurate alteration in their manners
ireland,s shame ,scotland,s burden

I haven't heard that saying before but it seems to sum up clan McCann in a most succinct manner. yes

by mysterion 18.02.14 18:54

What about the offence caused to those who still live in humble places? Some of whom may be members of this forum.

by Guest 18.02.14 19:29

mysterion wrote:What about the offence caused to those who still live in humble places? Some of whom may be members of this forum.

There's nothing wrong with being working-class, coming from humble origins or living in council flats. There's something very wrong with denying those roots, doing everything you can to distance yourself from them, using new 'middle-class' refinements in your language (pardon for what; serviette for napkin; dessert for pudding) striving to become better than your peers... in short, being an insufferable snob. liar

by travis macbickle 18.02.14 19:40

mysterion wrote:What about the offence caused to those who still live in humble places? Some of whom may be members of this forum.

thank you mysterion,on behalf of all the decent people from glasgow tenements(i,m sure jeremy paxman would agree!)

by Guest 18.02.14 19:46

ultimaThule wrote:
The 'disaster' was occasioned by an accomplice in the UK failing to know or realise that Portugal is not an hour ahead of UK time.

Kick-off in the UK was due to start at around midnight with a call to the Foreign Office requesting urgent help for relatives or friends whose child had been abducted and the Portuguese police were doing little about it, but whoever made the call did so before 11pm thus ensuring that (as far as I recall) the British consul in Portimao was aware of the event before the GNR, who received their first call at c10.47pm, were able to arrive at the scene.

And would also explain the still-unjemmied shutters remaining steadfastly closed and untampered-with despite Phil's shrieks to the contrary in Britain an hour earlier than planned. Hell, no-one had even had time to get the tools out of their blue bag.