Re: Apartment for Sale

by tiny 06.01.15 17:31

mysterion wrote:...... and before telling the T7. Did any of the T7 ask her the obvious question, "where have you looked for her?"

Of course they didn't,the tapas 7 knew what happened to Madeleine so no need to ask.

by ultimaThule 06.01.15 17:37

PeterMac wrote:Shutters like that do not lock. They are free to be pulled up using the rotating mechanism inside the box at the top, using the strap which is inside the house.
If you push them up, as I did, the mechanism does not rotate, so it all crunches up into the box and gets jammed, as you see.
Once you let go they come crunching back down again. Lots of noise but no result. You can't get in that way - on your own.
As eventually they admitted, without then going on to explain their alternative theory.
As the Bard might have said,

It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

As the Bard had Macbeth say 'She should have died hereafter" and Madeleine's brief candle should have gone out much nearer to end of this century than 2007.

But this is a tale told by idiots who, in strutting across the world's stage, have ensured their names have become synonymous with infamy and there's no chance of them being heard of no more. . .

As aunty Phil~~yerboots~~ said "It only needs one greedy, unscrupulous character to come forward" and all that remains to be seen is which of the numerous morally devoid individuals who populate this tale will be first to attempt to save their own neck?
.

by **PeterMac** 06.01.15 23:43

And to wrap up a few previous posts. ..

EVEN IF the shutters had been fully UP (from the inside, obviously) when Geering and Hate went into the apartment, one of them MUST have let them back DOWN, from the inside so that Geering then could go outside and discover that you could push them UP (but only a bit - and only very noisily) - (which somehow does not get mentioned in the book)

is there a mention of this in the "Version of the Truth" . . . (RHETORICAL, obviously !)

Small wonder that Mitchell had to "correct" the entire issue and to claim it was all a "red Herring"
and that they even had to post it on their blog site.

3 Point of entry
Claim
The intruder must have entered through the open shutters and open window
Later claim or admission
The open shutters and open window may not have been the point of entry or exit
During the week following the Dispatches programme the McCanns’ official
spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, announced that the McCanns now reversed their
previous stance on the break-in story.
“THE spokesman for the family of Madeleine McCann has reversed a statement
made in the early days of the search for the missing child. . . However, in the early
part of the hunt, friends and family members told journalists that the shutter on the
apartment where the McCanns were staying had been broken. . . "There was no
evidence of a break-in," said Mr Mitchell.
"I'm not going into the detail, but I can say that Kate and Gerry are firmly of the view
that somebody got into the apartment and took Madeleine out the window as their
means of escape, and to do that they did not necessarily have to tamper with
anything. They got out of the window fairly easily.” [20]
McCanns own website.
“Lisbon 14th January 2010
There are few points which have been raised in the last few days which I would like
to address specifically:
Abduction theory: For us, there is only the abduction theory possible because we
were not involved in Madeleine's disappearance and we know Madeleine did not
wander off by herself. It is obvious and right that the police should consider other
theories initially.
The window: I described to the police officers exactly what I found that night, as it
was and is highly relevant and I knew that every little detail could be helpful in
finding my daughter which is our only aim. The window which is a ground floor
window was completely open and is large enough for a person to easily climb
through it. Whether it had been opened for this purpose remains unknown. It could
of course have been opened by the perpetrator when inside the apartment as a
potential escape route or left open as a 'red herring'.

What she described, exactly as she found it, was of course the curtains WIDE OPEN
The tightly CLOSED and whooshing was not invented until 2009.

by Smokeandmirrors 07.01.15 6:01

The only thing I want to add to this, regarding the window issue, is that for the window to be a means of Madeleines exit, then it would HAVE to include an accomplice for Madeleine to be handed to, there is no other way. Due to the drop on the other side, the bed and chair etc, one or both arms being completely engaged in the carrying of a child, it would be WHOLLY IMPOSSIBLE to clamber through the window and out the other side WITHOUT disturbing the lichen dust on the ledge as evidenced by the CSI team, and Andy Redwood et al have NEVER implied as far as I am aware that they are looking for a tag team. Therefore, Redwood and co MUST have ruled out the window as being of any significance and be very much aware that this aspect of the story is suspect to say the least.

by biggles 07.01.15 7:53

Maybe the shutters were used prevent the body from being seen from outside?

by Smokeandmirrors 07.01.15 8:26

And Gerry's breaking of the shutters in the other bedroom earlier that week seems more than co-incidental to the false claims they were jemmied, smashed, broken and any other descriptives applied.

by woodforthetrees 07.01.15 11:28

Smokeandmirrors wrote:The only thing I want to add to this, regarding the window issue, is that for the window to be a means of Madeleines exit, then it would HAVE to include an accomplice for Madeleine to be handed to, there is no other way. Due to the drop on the other side, the bed and chair etc, one or both arms being completely engaged in the carrying of a child, it would be WHOLLY IMPOSSIBLE to clamber through the window and out the other side WITHOUT disturbing the lichen dust on the ledge as evidenced by the CSI team, and Andy Redwood et al have NEVER implied as far as I am aware that they are looking for a tag team. Therefore, Redwood and co MUST have ruled out the window as being of any significance and be very much aware that this aspect of the story is suspect to say the least.

You are presuming that a live Madeleine was 'abducted' here. With all the evidence, old and new, this was highly unlikely to be the case (even the McCanns were informed of that in 2007).

I believe the most plausible scenario that SY are following is that the perp entered the apartment via the unlocked door, performed whatever s3x act he wanted on her (got help her), she died and a clean up was done. Her body (then giving out cadaver scent) was wrapped in a blanket and possibly put in a certain missing blue bag and pushed out of the window as to not be seen (after the blinds had been rollered up from the inside using the tape).

The perp then went out of the door on his own (less suspicious as could be assumed to be a Mark Warner and picked up the body/bag/package) to be taken away. Hence no perp DNA on the window.

The rest of the 'shutters were broken' and shutter testing was just the McCanns peddling their ~~story~~ theory to maintain the premise that she is alive (to keep them in the clear).

IMO this all happened from 4pm on-wards and zero checking was actually being done by the tapas group (hence the panicked 'child checking rota' BS.

All IMO of course.

by **PeterMac** 07.01.15 11:34

Not enough time.

by Joss 07.01.15 11:43

woodforthetrees wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:The only thing I want to add to this, regarding the window issue, is that for the window to be a means of Madeleines exit, then it would HAVE to include an accomplice for Madeleine to be handed to, there is no other way. Due to the drop on the other side, the bed and chair etc, one or both arms being completely engaged in the carrying of a child, it would be WHOLLY IMPOSSIBLE to clamber through the window and out the other side WITHOUT disturbing the lichen dust on the ledge as evidenced by the CSI team, and Andy Redwood et al have NEVER implied as far as I am aware that they are looking for a tag team. Therefore, Redwood and co MUST have ruled out the window as being of any significance and be very much aware that this aspect of the story is suspect to say the least.

You are presuming that a live Madeleine was 'abducted' here. With all the evidence, old and new, this was highly unlikely to be the case (even the McCanns were informed of that in 2007).

I believe the most plausible scenario that SY are following is that the perp entered the apartment via the unlocked door, performed whatever s3x act he wanted on her (got help her), she died and a clean up was done. Her body (then giving out cadaver scent) was wrapped in a blanket and possibly put in a certain missing blue bag and pushed out of the window as to not be seen (after the blinds had been rollered up from the inside using the tape).

The perp then went out of the door on his own (less suspicious as could be assumed to be a Mark Warner and picked up the body/bag/package) to be taken away. Hence no perp DNA on the window.

The rest of the 'shutters were broken' and shutter testing was just the McCanns peddling their ~~story~~ theory to maintain the premise that she is alive (to keep them in the clear).

IMO this all happened from 4pm on-wards and zero checking was actually being done by the tapas group (hence the panicked 'child checking rota' BS.

All IMO of course.

I wonder how all of that would tie in with blood/cadaver evidence being behind the sofa, on the walls, on curtains, on K.McC's clothing & cadaver cat, on a child's t shirt, in the scenic boot of the car, in the wardrobe etc.???
And why would the perp take a deceased child with him? If it was a male that is, and if only one person was involved? Remembering also the scenic was hired some approx. 25 days from memory after the fact of a missing child that the dogs alerted to. Did the perp hire a scenic and place evidence in there and then air it out because of the smell?

by Smokeandmirrors 07.01.15 11:45

woodforthetrees wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:The only thing I want to add to this, regarding the window issue, is that for the window to be a means of Madeleines exit, then it would HAVE to include an accomplice for Madeleine to be handed to, there is no other way. Due to the drop on the other side, the bed and chair etc, one or both arms being completely engaged in the carrying of a child, it would be WHOLLY IMPOSSIBLE to clamber through the window and out the other side WITHOUT disturbing the lichen dust on the ledge as evidenced by the CSI team, and Andy Redwood et al have NEVER implied as far as I am aware that they are looking for a tag team. Therefore, Redwood and co MUST have ruled out the window as being of any significance and be very much aware that this aspect of the story is suspect to say the least.

You are presuming that a live Madeleine was 'abducted' here. With all the evidence, old and new, this was highly unlikely to be the case (even the McCanns were informed of that in 2007).

I believe the most plausible scenario that SY are following is that the perp entered the apartment via the unlocked door, performed whatever s3x act he wanted on her (got help her), she died and a clean up was done. Her body (then giving out cadaver scent) was wrapped in a blanket and possibly put in a certain missing blue bag and pushed out of the window as to not be seen (after the blinds had been rollered up from the inside using the tape).

The perp then went out of the door on his own (less suspicious as could be assumed to be a Mark Warner and picked up the body/bag/package) to be taken away. Hence no perp DNA on the window.

The rest of the 'shutters were broken' and shutter testing was just the McCanns peddling their ~~story~~ theory to maintain the premise that she is alive (to keep them in the clear).

IMO this all happened from 4pm on-wards and zero checking was actually being done by the tapas group (hence the panicked 'child checking rota' BS.

All IMO of course.

You couldn't be more wrong, I am explaining how the whole shutter thing COULD NOT be involved even if she HAD been abducted. But she wasn't and all indications point to her being "gone" in whichever way, by 1st May at the latest.

by woodforthetrees 07.01.15 11:49

PeterMac wrote:Not enough time.

You not think PeterMac?

lets trim the times down a bit more for good measure, say...

5pm- 9.15pm (tanner sighting which although dismissed in the public, IMO is still being considered)...

5pm- 7pm, performs whatever acts he wants and Madeleine dies.

7pm - 9pm panic, clean up and moves body around apartment wondering what to do, where to hide it, in which time, due to the age of the girl and the temperature, cadaver scent is now being spread about.

9pm, finally settles on the idea of taking the body away as itr contains his DNA, so wraps her in a blanket, opens the window and pushes the bag out so not to be seen, then leaves via the door, picking up the bag.

IMO based on the darkness and distance between tanner and tannerman, i think she did see something, but claimed it was a child in his arms not a bag, to add importance to it.

In, act carried out and gone, easily within the timeframe.

The checks by the tapas 7 weren't happening

Just a theory though, happy to be dis-proven so i can strike it off the list thumbsup

by woodforthetrees 07.01.15 11:57

Joss wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:The only thing I want to add to this, regarding the window issue, is that for the window to be a means of Madeleines exit, then it would HAVE to include an accomplice for Madeleine to be handed to, there is no other way. Due to the drop on the other side, the bed and chair etc, one or both arms being completely engaged in the carrying of a child, it would be WHOLLY IMPOSSIBLE to clamber through the window and out the other side WITHOUT disturbing the lichen dust on the ledge as evidenced by the CSI team, and Andy Redwood et al have NEVER implied as far as I am aware that they are looking for a tag team. Therefore, Redwood and co MUST have ruled out the window as being of any significance and be very much aware that this aspect of the story is suspect to say the least.

You are presuming that a live Madeleine was 'abducted' here. With all the evidence, old and new, this was highly unlikely to be the case (even the McCanns were informed of that in 2007).

I believe the most plausible scenario that SY are following is that the perp entered the apartment via the unlocked door, performed whatever s3x act he wanted on her (got help her), she died and a clean up was done. Her body (then giving out cadaver scent) was wrapped in a blanket and possibly put in a certain missing blue bag and pushed out of the window as to not be seen (after the blinds had been rollered up from the inside using the tape).

The perp then went out of the door on his own (less suspicious as could be assumed to be a Mark Warner and picked up the body/bag/package) to be taken away. Hence no perp DNA on the window.

The rest of the 'shutters were broken' and shutter testing was just the McCanns peddling their ~~story~~ theory to maintain the premise that she is alive (to keep them in the clear).

IMO this all happened from 4pm on-wards and zero checking was actually being done by the tapas group (hence the panicked 'child checking rota' BS.

All IMO of course.
I wonder how all of that would tie in with blood/cadaver evidence being behind the sofa, on the walls, on curtains, on K.McC's clothing & cadaver cat, on a child's t shirt, in the scenic boot of the car, in the wardrobe etc.???
And why would the perp take a deceased child with him? If it was a male that is, and if only one person was involved? Remembering also the scenic was hired some approx. 25 days from memory after the fact of a missing child that the dogs alerted to. Did the perp hire a scenic and place evidence in there and then air it out because of the smell?

The blood/cadaver would have come from a deceased Madeleine, which had been spread about as the perp was moving her body around the apartment, panicking, wondering what to do and what scenario to 'set up'.

Cadaver in the wardrobe from the perp touching the area looking for blankets to wrap the body in.

Scrap the blue bag theory, as this was still in the cupboard after the police arrived (more coffee needed, apologies), just a blanket then, or another bag if there was one there.

Why take a deceased child?.... If the perp left DNA in/on the body, then he is in serious trouble, not just from s3xually abusing her, but that and murder, so take the body with him!

The scenic is the 1 thing that still makes me question everything, but until the new DNA tests can prove that the samples of Madeleines came from a deceased corpse, then i personally would have to presume that the findings were just from her items of clothing etc that had been transported in the boot. I don't think for 1 minute the perp hired the Scenic and planted evidence to frame the McCanns, i think that's a bit too Hollywood.

The cadaver in the hire car...now that is a big question, but SY must have an answer for that else they would've been hauled in. Most likely that they know of/suspect that someone/something else in the car has alerted the cadaver dogs.

by Joss 07.01.15 12:05

woodforthetrees wrote:
Joss wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:The only thing I want to add to this, regarding the window issue, is that for the window to be a means of Madeleines exit, then it would HAVE to include an accomplice for Madeleine to be handed to, there is no other way. Due to the drop on the other side, the bed and chair etc, one or both arms being completely engaged in the carrying of a child, it would be WHOLLY IMPOSSIBLE to clamber through the window and out the other side WITHOUT disturbing the lichen dust on the ledge as evidenced by the CSI team, and Andy Redwood et al have NEVER implied as far as I am aware that they are looking for a tag team. Therefore, Redwood and co MUST have ruled out the window as being of any significance and be very much aware that this aspect of the story is suspect to say the least.

You are presuming that a live Madeleine was 'abducted' here. With all the evidence, old and new, this was highly unlikely to be the case (even the McCanns were informed of that in 2007).

I believe the most plausible scenario that SY are following is that the perp entered the apartment via the unlocked door, performed whatever s3x act he wanted on her (got help her), she died and a clean up was done. Her body (then giving out cadaver scent) was wrapped in a blanket and possibly put in a certain missing blue bag and pushed out of the window as to not be seen (after the blinds had been rollered up from the inside using the tape).

The perp then went out of the door on his own (less suspicious as could be assumed to be a Mark Warner and picked up the body/bag/package) to be taken away. Hence no perp DNA on the window.

The rest of the 'shutters were broken' and shutter testing was just the McCanns peddling their ~~story~~ theory to maintain the premise that she is alive (to keep them in the clear).

IMO this all happened from 4pm on-wards and zero checking was actually being done by the tapas group (hence the panicked 'child checking rota' BS.

All IMO of course.
I wonder how all of that would tie in with blood/cadaver evidence being behind the sofa, on the walls, on curtains, on K.McC's clothing & cadaver cat, on a child's t shirt, in the scenic boot of the car, in the wardrobe etc.???
And why would the perp take a deceased child with him? If it was a male that is, and if only one person was involved? Remembering also the scenic was hired some approx. 25 days from memory after the fact of a missing child that the dogs alerted to. Did the perp hire a scenic and place evidence in there and then air it out because of the smell?

The blood/cadaver would have come from a deceased Madeleine, which had been spread about as the perp was moving her body around the apartment, panicking, wondering what to do and what scenario to 'set up'.

Cadaver in the wardrobe from the perp touching the area looking for blankets to wrap the body in.

Scrap the blue bag theory, as this was still in the cupboard after the police arrived (more coffee needed, apologies), just a blanket then, or another bag if there was one there.

Why take a deceased child?.... If the perp left DNA in/on the body, then he is in serious trouble, not just from s3xually abusing her, but that and murder, so take the body with him!

The scenic is the 1 thing that still makes me question everything, but until the new DNA tests can prove that the samples of Madeleines came from a deceased corpse, then i personally would have to presume that the findings were just from her items of clothing etc that had been transported in the boot. I don't think for 1 minute the perp hired the Scenic and planted evidence to frame the McCanns, i think that's a bit too Hollywood.

The cadaver in the hire car...now that is a big question, but SY must have an answer for that else they would've been hauled in. Most likely that they know of/suspect that someone/something else in the car has alerted the cadaver dogs.

Or SY are completely ignoring the dog alerts to blood & cadaver so as not to implicate the McC's in any wrong doing? for reasons only they are aware of. Orders from higher up?

by woodforthetrees 07.01.15 14:01

Joss wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Joss wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:The only thing I want to add to this, regarding the window issue, is that for the window to be a means of Madeleines exit, then it would HAVE to include an accomplice for Madeleine to be handed to, there is no other way. Due to the drop on the other side, the bed and chair etc, one or both arms being completely engaged in the carrying of a child, it would be WHOLLY IMPOSSIBLE to clamber through the window and out the other side WITHOUT disturbing the lichen dust on the ledge as evidenced by the CSI team, and Andy Redwood et al have NEVER implied as far as I am aware that they are looking for a tag team. Therefore, Redwood and co MUST have ruled out the window as being of any significance and be very much aware that this aspect of the story is suspect to say the least.

You are presuming that a live Madeleine was 'abducted' here. With all the evidence, old and new, this was highly unlikely to be the case (even the McCanns were informed of that in 2007).

I believe the most plausible scenario that SY are following is that the perp entered the apartment via the unlocked door, performed whatever s3x act he wanted on her (got help her), she died and a clean up was done. Her body (then giving out cadaver scent) was wrapped in a blanket and possibly and pushed out of the window as to not be seen (after the blinds had been rollered up from the inside using the tape).

The perp then went out of the door on his own (less suspicious as could be assumed to be a Mark Warner and picked up the body/bag/package) to be taken away. Hence no perp DNA on the window.

The rest of the 'shutters were broken' and shutter testing was just the McCanns peddling their ~~story~~ theory to maintain the premise that she is alive (to keep them in the clear).

IMO this all happened from 4pm on-wards and zero checking was actually being done by the tapas group (hence the panicked 'child checking rota' BS.

All IMO of course.
I wonder how all of that would tie in with blood/cadaver evidence being behind the sofa, on the walls, on curtains, on K.McC's clothing & cadaver cat, on a child's t shirt, in the scenic boot of the car, in the wardrobe etc.???
And why would the perp take a deceased child with him? If it was a male that is, and if only one person was involved? Remembering also the scenic was hired some approx. 25 days from memory after the fact of a missing child that the dogs alerted to. Did the perp hire a scenic and place evidence in there and then air it out because of the smell?

The blood/cadaver would have come from a deceased Madeleine, which had been spread about as the perp was moving her body around the apartment, panicking, wondering what to do and what scenario to 'set up'.

Cadaver in the wardrobe from the perp touching the area looking for blankets to wrap the body in.

Scrap the blue bag theory, as this was still in the cupboard after the police arrived (more coffee needed, apologies), just a blanket then, or another bag if there was one there.

Why take a deceased child?.... If the perp left DNA in/on the body, then he is in serious trouble, not just from s3xually abusing her, but that and murder, so take the body with him!

The scenic is the 1 thing that still makes me question everything, but until the new DNA tests can prove that the samples of Madeleines came from a deceased corpse, then i personally would have to presume that the findings were just from her items of clothing etc that had been transported in the boot. I don't think for 1 minute the perp hired the Scenic and planted evidence to frame the McCanns, i think that's a bit too Hollywood.

The cadaver in the hire car...now that is a big question, but SY must have an answer for that else they would've been hauled in. Most likely that they know of/suspect that someone/something else in the car has alerted the cadaver dogs.
Or SY are completely ignoring the dog alerts to blood & cadaver so as not to implicate the McC's in any wrong doing? for reasons only they are aware of. Orders from higher up?

SY either a) know that regardless of the evidence available in the hire car, it does not point to death specifically relating to Madeleine or guilt of any one individual, therefore would be a waste of time pursuing that angle in court. Or..
b) SY have access to additional investigation results and DNA testing, whether historic records or new records, that you and i will never get access to, which proves categorically that it is nothing to do with them, whether this be details of other activity in the car, or new testing on the Madeleine samples.

Either way, if the hire car was of interest either to the PJ or to SY, it would , to this day, still be in police storage. It isn't, it was handed back quite early on, which means they must have felt that holding onto it would be no help to the investigation whatsoever.

This is why, although i would love to think that the hire car is the key to involvement of the parents, the fact that nothing was enough to nail them, leads me to remove the hire car from any of my personal theories at this point.

I think the only protection/help from the top (masons, friends in police and politics) is in the form of extending the timeline by moving the sighting to the 10pm one by the Smiths to ensure that the public perception is that they were checking their kids, when deep down SY etc know they weren't. This way, they can nail the lone paedo they are searching for (whoever that may be, one of the group or a known paedo in the area) whilst keeping the McCanns clear of neglect and out of prison/free from lynch mob attacks.

IMO of course.

by **PeterMac** 07.01.15 14:38

You've lost me completely. Sorry.

by woodforthetrees 07.01.15 15:03

PeterMac wrote:You've lost me completely. Sorry.

To put simply...

person enters apartment, commits act, kills Madeleine, panics, tidies up, wraps body up and passes out of the window as less chance of being seen.

There was no 3 min window of opportunity as cadaver scent takes longer. No kid checking going on means Madeleine last seen alive since between 4-5pm.

9pm - the first 'abductor sighting' is 9.15. This is a big enough window for sentence 1 above.

However, this points to no child checking, hence the changing of stories (covered in the smith sighting threads)

The car... as discussed above, nothing conclusive, hence the car was released.

As you are well aware being ex forces PeterMac, the 'released files' are purely the PII files and NOT the full police files, therefore SY obviously have more details/justifications than we have to hand.

by Guest 07.01.15 15:11

woodforthetrees,

What you are saying makes no sense.

by **PeterMac** 07.01.15 15:38

BlueBag wrote:woodforthetrees,
What you are saying makes no sense.

Thanks. I thought it was just me !

by Silverspeed 07.01.15 15:51

5pm- 7pm, performs whatever acts he wants and Madeleine dies.

Sorry Woodforthetrees but I thought Kate was supposed to be in the apartment during most of that timeframe bathing the children and getting them ready for bed. Not forgetting of course the alleged 30min or 30sec David Payne visit. How would this tie in with your theory?

by woodforthetrees 07.01.15 16:05

Silverspeed wrote:5pm- 7pm, performs whatever acts he wants and Madeleine dies.

Sorry Woodforthetrees but I thought Kate was supposed to be in the apartment during most of that timeframe bathing the children and getting them ready for bed. Not forgetting of course the alleged 30min or 30sec David Payne visit. How would this tie in with your theory?

Maybe i am mistaken on that, if so i apologize. I was under the impression that Amaral had stated that no-one had seen Madeleine alive since around 4.30pm?

In which case the time for the act/death/moving of Madeleine to take place is more like 7.30-10pm if we go by the smith sighting and 'no checking'? Still enough time for the cadaver scent to start in the apartnent.

I do remember the story about Kate being in the apartment , but of course it is only what the tapas group have stated, which as we know should be taken with a pinch of salt.

by **PeterMac** 07.01.15 16:54

I think you need to re-read some of the statements.
http://mccannfiles.com/
is a good place to find them

by woodforthetrees 07.01.15 17:11

PeterMac wrote:I think you need to re-read some of the statements.
http://mccannfiles.com/
is a good place to find them

I'm more interested in independent witness information than the tapas statements PeterMac, as the tapas ones aren't worth a *&%*

Non of them add up and they are all covering up for their own child neglect on the holiday.

I'll have a read through the info available though, as i am pretty sure Amaral stated somewhere that there is no independent witness sighting of Madeleine from around 4.30pm.

What i am confident of is that SY seem to have knowledge/evidence/DNA evidence to discard the hire car, confirm that the McCanns or the Tapas are not suspects and that the perp was a lone paedo, not known to them (this bit i think could be questionable) and now are clearly going along with the theory she did not leave the apartment alive.

Until either the perp is found/talks, or a body is found (unlikely), then as long as the McCanns et al stick to their stories, the group are in the clear and the gravy train for all parties continues.

Such a shame.

by MissesWillYa 07.01.15 17:22

I've seen some sketches of people who live in that town. What a bunch, each one uglier than the last. Except for that one guy who looks just like my favorite Beatle...yum.

by Silverspeed 07.01.15 17:30

MissesWillYa wrote:I've seen some sketches of people who live in that town. What a bunch, each one uglier than the last. Except for that one guy who looks just like my favorite Beatle...yum.

by MissesWillYa 07.01.15 17:53

Silverspeed wrote:
MissesWillYa wrote:I've seen some sketches of people who live in that town. What a bunch, each one uglier than the last. Except for that one guy who looks just like my favorite Beatle...yum.

You know, "Monster Man," AKA "George Harrison Man," one of the many potential abductors.

Apartment for Sale - Page 2 2ndPicture2

by **PeterMac** 07.01.15 22:09

" />

or these ?

Apartment for Sale - Page 2 <a href=

" />

by Mo 08.01.15 21:54

This has recently been posted on Textusa blog

http://portugalresident.com/exclusive-%E2%80%9Cmark-warner-pulls-out-of-praia-da-luz%E2%80%9D-the-real-story

Posted by portugalpress on January 08, 2015

Exclusive: “Mark Warner pulls out of Praia da Luz” - the real story

News that holiday company Mark Warner has pulled out of Praia da Luz’s Ocean Club resort has been doing the rounds of mainstream media - particularly in UK - and been angled to suggest that the holiday resort has somehow been further stigmatised by the legacy of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. This couldn’t be further from the truth.

In fact, we are told, what has happened promises to bring a whole new wave of business both to the Ocean Club and the village of Luz.

Portugal Resident got wind of the story before Christmas when internet forums began speculating that “the curse of the McCanns has finally done it to Praia da Luz”.

They were reacting to the announcement online by The Vacation Company website which said: “We regret to inform you that Mark Warner no longer have a contract with the Ocean Club and therefore this property has been removed from their Summer 2015 programme with immediate effect.”

But as Ocean Club manager Donna Hill told us, they were reacting without knowing the facts.

Mark Warner’s owners, Mark Chitty and Andrew Searle, had simply decided to offer the Ocean Club exclusively to travel company Thomas Cook.

Chitty and Searle’s holiday company has pulled out of Portugal - not because of any fall-off in business over the disappearance of Madeleine McCann but because Thomas Cook has offered them “a very good deal”, said Ms Hill.

“We’re all excited about it,” she added. “This is actually a golden opportunity for the Ocean Club as now everyone staying here will come from the same operator and we will be able to offer the same services for all our guests.

“This didn’t happen before as we had some people staying on the resort that came through Mark Warner and others that didn’t.

“It made organising activities extremely difficult, whereas now we’ll be able to put things on for everyone equally.

“We are all looking forward to it - and we’re hoping for an excellent 2015 season!”

In fact, despite the Madeleine “legacy” which still sees periodic moments of media chaos as police return to the Algarve to initiate new inquiries, business in Luz has been steadily growing with locals last year reporting a very good summer all round.

“It’s what everyone wants,” explained one shopkeeper. “We all just want to get on with our lives and our businesses and forget the bad press attached to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.”

By NATASHA DONN news@algarveresident.com

by ultimaThule 08.01.15 23:19

Covered here Mo https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t10827p20-sunday-mirror-4-jan-2015-blames-madeleine-disappearance-for-mark-warner-pull-out-from-praia-da-luz#298807

by Mo 09.01.15 1:18

ultimaThule wrote:Covered here Mo https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t10827p20-sunday-mirror-4-jan-2015-blames-madeleine-disappearance-for-mark-warner-pull-out-from-praia-da-luz#298807

Sorry I posted on the wrong thread!