The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™️ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann. Please note that your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Understanding Various Motives

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Understanding Various Motives

Post by Ssejors on 11.10.16 20:16

SO I have done some reading on various Forums, blogs, and websites. 

Watched interviews.  Ive tried to be non biased from the start, by sticking to original interviews and reading statements etc  

I am having a hard time understanding the motives of certain folks involved.  

To start, I, Like HiDeHo, started noticing discrepancies with statements and the daycare/creche records. I started asking myself questions, as a mother of three kids.  Why would the McCanns pick up the twins from the Creche first? I saw maps of the area, and the creche records.  IT made no sense.  As a parent on Vacation, I would go get the oldest furthest kid first, and walk back to get the twins who would likely be in a stroller.  Why would you take the twins all that way across the resort?  (SPEAKING OF strollers, was Madeleine in a stroller that week, or just on foot? Did the twins sit in a double stroller?)

There are a few other things that really make me think that no one actually SAW Madeleine after Sunday. 

So my question is, 

What is the motive for someone like Cat Baker to lie?  

Is she Lying because she was paid?  Is she lying because the McCann's managed to dupe her for four days, dropping off and picking up NO Madeleine, and sort of passing off their friends daughter as Maddy? It occured to me that perhaps those four days, CB, thought the other girl WAS maddy, was it David Paynes daughter who was in the same Creche as maddy.    I can almost see how you could just pop your head in the door, sign the sheet, give a wave and say good morning, and point at another kid and say, we will come back for MAddy at 12:30   see yah. and have CB totally buffaloed...


CB - Is that kids name Maddy or Julia? - NOT A QUOTE.   And then again pop your head in around lunch and say We grabbed maddy, Ill sign her out! 

Maybe CB was negligent with the sign in sheets and attention to detail when it came to kids coming and going, and is half assed covering her own hide.  
The sign in records for the creche are bogus.  Kate herself said she was Kate Healy until all this happened. Yet she signed her name in the Creche records at Kate Mccann??  

So that leads me to believe that the records are not accurate and CB was negligent with them. I also think that she could have been paid. 

What motive do the friends of the Mccanns, the tapas 7, have to lie? 

What motive does Jane Tanner have to make up an abductor?  Do I think there was an abductor???  nooooooo way
but why did she lie?  

What is in it for the Tapas 7?  For any of these people?  I sincerely think that Madeleine was gone after Sunday, and with so many kids on that resort, that was not hard to hide. Do these friends think there was an innocent ACCIDENT that they are helping to keep the mccanns out of trouble?  Do these friends KNOW there was an innocent accident??  


I think the most outlandish idea that has popped into my head, yet the only one that adds up, is that the Tapas 7 were made aware of, or were witness to a terrible accident that happened to madeleine, which resulted in her death, that everyone agreed they would help the Mccanns maintain that Madeleine was missing, concocting an abduction story, a Missing Persons Campaign and a life time strategy to deal with and accept that Madeleine had died from stupid parenting choices, all to keep the Mccanns out of prison and ensure they could keep their careers and remaining family.  Child Neglect would have ruined their careers and likely their whole family. Is that enough for YOUR friends to lie to police about a missing child?

Ssejors

Posts : 4
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2016-09-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by Tony Bennett on 11.10.16 22:39

Ssejors wrote:So my question is, 

What is the motive for someone like Cat Baker to lie?  Maybe CB was negligent with the sign in sheets and attention to detail when it came to kids coming and going, and is half assed covering her own hide.  The sign in records for the creche are bogus.  Kate herself said she was Kate Healy until all this happened. Yet she signed her name in the Creche records at Kate McCann??  So that leads me to believe that the records are not accurate and CB was negligent with them. I also think that she could have been paid...
We do not know if Catriona Baker lied about anything at all.

However, there are a lot of points of interest about her worthy of consideration:

1. Could she already have known the McCanns? She was Facebook Friends in 2006 with Chloe Corner, the daughter of Madeleine's godfather, Jon Corner. That alone suggests a prior connection. Jon Corner also said he often visited Praia da Luz. That is another point of interest.

2. Catriona Baker had worked for Mark Warner the previous year.

3. Catriona Baker's crèche sheets most certainly have multiple inconsistencies and gaps - and they do not match up with Kate McCann's own accounts of events that week

4. Catriona Baker's statement about taking Madeleine sailing on Thursday morning is not confirmed by other staff 

5. Catriona Baker in her evidence about Madeleine makes only vague, uncheckable statements; she gives no detail at all about how Madeleine behaved in the creche that week and what exactly she did

6. Catriona Baker's initial statement about the alleged 'high tea' at 5.30pm to 6pm on Thursday 3 May changed in her later statement

7. Catriona Baker's statement about that alleged high tea does not correspond with statements made by the McCanns about that high tea, nor with a subsequent statement about it made by Charlotte Pennington        

8. Catriona Baker remained close friends with the McCanns, visitig them in November 2007 aroujnd the time the Panorama documentary was being put together:



In general terms, why would anyone lie about a serious incident like a missing person or a death?

The commonest reasons are:

A. Direct or indirect involvement in or responsibiity for whatever happened
B. Fear of the repercussions of telling the truth (e.g. if you are threatened with consquences
C. Financial inducement
D. A strong bond of loyalty with a close relative or friend.

If someone seems to be lying, the reason is usually one of those four

____________________

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - Paul's first letter to his disciple Timothy,  1 Timothy 1 v 15

avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14675
Reputation : 2816
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by suzyjohnson on 16.10.16 2:18

It could be that Catriona Baker was not lying, perhaps she just likes to be in the centre of things?

Further to Tony Bennett's comments above (common reasons A B C or D why people lie) some possible reasons that the tapas group might be prepared to lie for the McCann's (or for themselves) ........ 

1) One, or more, of the doctors (not necessarily the McCanns) could have attempted a medical procedure, or given Madeleine medicine, that went wrong which could have resulted in disastrous consequences for their careers

2) Several of the group's children may have been sedated meaning they may all have faced prosecution or they may all have feared neglect charges.

3) Madeleine may have taken an illegal drug belonging to any member of the holiday group, or the majority of the group may have taken illegal drugs on the night

4) For compassionate reasons, they may have fully sympathised with the McCann's situation, possibly recognising that what had occurred could have happened to any of their children

5) Another member of the group, not necessarily the McCann's, may have been responsible for an accident happening to Madeleine

6) They could have been persuaded to lie without being aware of the full facts of the case

7) The McCann's might be lying to protect someone else in the group, not the other way round.

8) If they had all neglected to obtain medical help which Madeleine might have been in need of. 

9) If they needed to back each other up regarding frequent checking, to avoid neglect charges against several members of the group (not just the McCanns)

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1192
Reputation : 261
Join date : 2013-03-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by Tony Bennett on 16.10.16 10:15

suzyjohnson wrote:It could be that Catriona Baker was not lying, perhaps she just likes to be in the centre of things?
The problem with that analysis is that people who 'just' like to be at the centre of things often lie. 

To state that Madeleine was present at an alleged high tea, and that she saw Madeleine that same morning when she went sailing, if those things were not true, would not just be a lie, it would be a massive lie.

So great a lie (if it was, that is), that it led Goncalo Amaral to believe it - and therefore ignore all sorts of other potentially necessary lines of enquiry.

If it were ever proved that she lied about these two crucial alleged events on Thursday 3 May 2007, she would merit a very stiff sentence indeed for perverting the course of justice.

____________________

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - Paul's first letter to his disciple Timothy,  1 Timothy 1 v 15

avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14675
Reputation : 2816
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by Verdi on 16.10.16 12:23

Goncalo Amaral had little or no choice but to direct the investigation according to the words of the McCanns, their group of holiday friends, a few others on the periphery with the influence of the UK authorities poking around.

Working under extraordinary conditions and without being able to conduct a routine investigation, how was he to have known of any previous connection between different persons.  Indeed, if you read his book, he makes it quite clear that the investigation was being hampered by outside interference and more importantly, the withholding of information from the UK vital to the investigation.

From day one, the investigation swiftly turned from being the case of a missing child pure and simple, into a massive defend McCann campaign.  Personally, I don't believe for a second that the PACT was related in any way to reputation management - you don't need lawyers for that, nor a planned indefinite publicity campaign. I firmly believe the group were seriously involved with whatever it was going on in and around the Ocean Club that led to Madeleine's disappearance, any other attempted excuse for the PACT is but human frailty, a natural unwillingness to accept the dark side of life.

Let's never forget the presence of Fiona Payne's mother Dianne Webster.  Snipped from her witness statement taken on 11th May 2007..

She states that she came on holiday at the invitation of her daughter FIONA and son-in-law DAVID - Adding that she does not know the reasons why Portugal was chosen, nor why Praia da Luz and the "Ocean Garden Club" in particular.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANNE_WEBSTER_11-MAY07.htm

Why was she invited by her daughter and son- in-law?  To attend to domestic affairs whilst the rest of the group were so into each other - or what?

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 6211
Reputation : 3442
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by sandancer on 16.10.16 15:50

The presence of Dianne Webster has always puzzled me .
She had never been way with them before.
She made her own plane reservation.
She didn't know any of the others.
Why this holiday , what was so different this time ?
She made lunches for all ( apart from the McCanns )
Looked after the children on their afternoon nap.
What a boring holiday ,well that's my opinion anyway .
avatar
sandancer

Posts : 496
Reputation : 749
Join date : 2016-02-18
Age : 64
Location : Tyneside

Back to top Go down

Understanding various motives

Post by G-Unit on 16.10.16 16:59

sandancer wrote:The presence of Dianne Webster has always puzzled me .
She had never been way with them before.
She made her own plane reservation.
She didn't know any of the others.
Why this holiday , what was so different this time ?
She made lunches for all ( apart from the McCanns )
Looked after the children on their afternoon nap.
What a boring holiday ,well that's my opinion anyway .
Would most grandmothers be interested in spending time with their grandchildren or helping with them to give the parents a break? 

Mrs Webster left two empty beds in the second bedroom because she didn't want to sleep in the same room as her granddaughter, preferring to set up a bed settee in the living room every night. 

She also never dropped off or collected the children at/from their creches. 

She categorically denied seeing Mathew Oldfield on her way to the restaurant on 3rd;

That, at that time, the whole group were at the restaurant. The witness did not recall, but thinks that perhaps Gerald and MATT had not been in the restaurant along with the other members of the group. 
- In this regard, asked specifically whether, on the journey to the restaurant, if they had passed either of the two individuals described in the preceding paragraph, she answered categorically not. 
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANNE_WEBSTER_11-MAY07.htm



A year later in her rog. interview she had managed to remember seeing him after all. 
avatar
G-Unit

Posts : 322
Reputation : 62
Join date : 2014-12-29
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by Verdi on 16.10.16 20:32

Grandparents can be a godsend or conversely they can be a damn nuisance with their constant interference.

Here we have one Diane Webster who has never knowingly openly contested the groups version of events.   She allegedly dined every night with the rest of the gang, despite seemingly having nothing in common with them and still she remained at the Tapas restaurant table for a few minutes on the night of 3rd May, after Kate McCann had raised the alarm and the gang had rushed off to apartment 5a.  A couple of stories spread abroad by various mediums to explain this a) she was told to stay there in case Madeleine wandered in and b) to look after the groups valuables - either one sounds unlikely considering the severity of the situation.  An active grandmother I would suggest, would be one of the first to get stuck in but no not this one, this one stayed seated at the restaurant for no accountable reason.

Whatever, according to her witness statement she left the table after a few minutes and made her way to apartment 5a, the McCanns abode.  No problem so far until, in her witness statement taken on 11th May 2007, she says..

'At the time described above she remained about 10 minutes in the apartment [5a]. After this time she returned to the restaurant to get her handbag as well as the camera of the couple McCANN and "baby monitor" of her daughter, and was soon back again in the apartment.'

So not only was she very casual about Kate McCann's panic alarm, she was also very casual about leaving valuables at a public restaurant table for about 10 + minutes.  She left her handbag, a camera [as an aside, the group couldn't recall whether they had a camera with them] and a baby monitor at the table - items that could have so easily been taken when she left the table in the first place?

I can quite understand confusion arising in a panic situation as regards timing and minute detail of circumstances but here we have a cool, calm and collected woman of advanced years, totally in control of herself and the situation she found herself in - a grandmother whose baby granddaughter had just disappeared?  Somehow I don't think so.

This is no ordinary grandmother.  bignono

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 6211
Reputation : 3442
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by Get'emGonçalo on 16.10.16 20:57

Verdi wrote:Grandparents can be a godsend or conversely they can be a damn nuisance with their constant interference.

Here we have one Diane Webster who has never knowingly openly contested the groups version of events.   She allegedly dined every night with the rest of the gang, despite seemingly having nothing in common with them and still she remained at the Tapas restaurant table for a few minutes on the night of 3rd May, after Kate McCann had raised the alarm and the gang had rushed off to apartment 5a.  A couple of stories spread abroad by various mediums to explain this a) she was told to stay there in case Madeleine wandered in and b) to look after the groups valuables - either one sounds unlikely considering the severity of the situation.  An active grandmother I would suggest, would be one of the first to get stuck in but no not this one, this one stayed seated at the restaurant for no accountable reason.

Whatever, according to her witness statement she left the table after a few minutes and made her way to apartment 5a, the McCanns abode.  No problem so far until, in her witness statement taken on 11th May 2007, she says..

'At the time described above she remained about 10 minutes in the apartment [5a]. After this time she returned to the restaurant to get her handbag as well as the camera of the couple McCANN and "baby monitor" of her daughter, and was soon back again in the apartment.'

So not only was she very casual about Kate McCann's panic alarm, she was also very casual about leaving valuables at a public restaurant table for about 10 + minutes.  She left her handbag, a camera [as an aside, the group couldn't recall whether they had a camera with them] and a baby monitor at the table - items that could have so easily been taken when she left the table in the first place?

I can quite understand confusion arising in a panic situation as regards timing and minute detail of circumstances but here we have a cool, calm and collected woman of advanced years, totally in control of herself and the situation she found herself in - a grandmother whose baby granddaughter had just disappeared?  Somehow I don't think so.

This is no ordinary grandmother.  bignono
It wasn't her granddaughter.
avatar
Get'emGonçalo


Posts : 9817
Reputation : 4926
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by lj on 16.10.16 21:19

Didn't she say she first thought it was a kind of joke?

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

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

Posts : 3322
Reputation : 195
Join date : 2009-12-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by Verdi on 16.10.16 22:46

Get'emGonçalo wrote:It wasn't her granddaughter.
Of course it wasn't - what an ass, where the hell did that come from?


____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 6211
Reputation : 3442
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by Roxyroo on 17.10.16 12:46

Yes Dianne Webster has been bugging me too, she seems so much like the odd one out and doesn't even seem to be that much of a hands on grandmother.
Another big bug-  if they wanted a peaceful night with the children all sleeping uninterrupted why the hell would you keep going in and out of the flats!?! That's a sure fire way to wake them up! Having all these different people coming into unfamiliar holiday flats bumbling about in the dark every few minutes! And why do none of the t7 say they ever bumped into each other on the way, they were all up and down like yoyos!
This is what is leading me more to believe the all in one room theory, as the opposite is just so ridiculous to be believable

____________________
Everything I post is ALL MY OWN OPINION and therefore I.m allowed to think whatever I please! gm
avatar
Roxyroo

Posts : 407
Reputation : 270
Join date : 2016-04-04
Location : Scotland

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by Verdi on 17.10.16 15:47

lj wrote:Didn't she say she first thought it was a kind of joke?
I vaguely rememberthat but it isn't recorded in any of her witness statements so maybe it was taken from a press report.  She did however state during her rogatory interview..

4078 ”How did she look?”

Reply ”Well I don’t know, frightened or absolutely, well, it’s very difficult to take in when something like that, you know, you’re just sitting at a table having what was a nice meal and err everybody just, you know, stopped what they were doing and just got up and Fiona said to me you know, I said what do you want me to do and she said you stay there in case err you know if Madeleine, because at that time we didn’t know what had happened because I think Gerry had sort of said to Kate oh she can’t be, you know. Err so I, I stayed at the table in case Madeleine had wandered off and she might come looking round the restaurant. Err this is when it gets all a bit confusing because I’ve no idea how long I, I stayed there. I don’t, I don’t think it was that long and I know that at one point, again, this wasn’t in my original statement, Dave did come back to the table and say can, can you just go back to the apartment, but all this is very, very, very vague and I know when I left the table I went, I did go into err Kate and Gerry’s err apartment, which was just absolute err just terrible.”
----------

Extraordinary how the memory improves over a period of time - I wish I could boast such perspicacy.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 6211
Reputation : 3442
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by Verdi on 17.10.16 15:50

Roxyroo wrote:Having all these different people coming into unfamiliar holiday flats bumbling about in the dark every few minutes!
big grin Up and down like a fiddlers elbow violin .

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 6211
Reputation : 3442
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding various motives

Post by willowthewisp on 17.10.16 17:35

Hi Verdi,statement 4078,does Diane Webster account for Gerry being at the Tapas bar,well according to this statement,he is there when Kate informs the group of Madeleine's disappearance,that is if this statement is truthful?

willowthewisp

Posts : 1809
Reputation : 724
Join date : 2015-05-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by suzyjohnson on 18.10.16 1:04

Tony Bennett wrote:
suzyjohnson wrote:It could be that Catriona Baker was not lying, perhaps she just likes to be in the centre of things?
The problem with that analysis is that people who 'just' like to be at the centre of things often lie. 

To state that Madeleine was present at an alleged high tea, and that she saw Madeleine that same morning when she went sailing, if those things were not true, would not just be a lie, it would be a massive lie.

So great a lie (if it was, that is), that it led Goncalo Amaral to believe it - and therefore ignore all sorts of other potentially necessary lines of enquiry.

If it were ever proved that she lied about these two crucial alleged events on Thursday 3 May 2007, she would merit a very stiff sentence indeed for perverting the course of justice.
Sorry, yes, I just reread what I had said and it doesn't make sense.

I meant that perhaps Miss Baker was not deliberately telling lies on behalf on the McCanns but that perhaps she is the type who says things without thinking, makes things up or exaggerates, because she likes being in the centre of things.

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1192
Reputation : 261
Join date : 2013-03-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by skyrocket on 18.10.16 8:40

Re: Dianne Webster.


At the time Dianne was 63 years old. She did a good job in her interviews as coming across as a bumbling old (which she obviously wasn't) woman but I believe there is far more to her than meets the eye. 


Her rogatory is full of slip ups on points she should easily remember, here's a few just for starters:


She can't settle on one or two minibuses/taxis to get to EMA on 28 April but finally says: 'we all went in two mini buses to the airport'.

Then she continues: 'but there was nothing untoward, you know, it was just a normal err journey there'.

How many children Dianne? 'because obviously there were five children in the group and I think there was only, I don’t know if it was one seat or two seats, so there was a bit of time spent at the airport trying to find  other seats err and I don’t think we did manage to get all six in the end,'


How many of the group lived in Leicestershire (10 actually with the McCanns, but how many travelled from EMA)? 'there was something about the timing coming back that wasn’t really suitable for children err the fact that err four of the group, or five of them including me, lived in the Leicestershire area, whereas, whereas err..'


What's the obsession with the Payne's having the larger apartment (they didn't - 3 families had T2 apartments): 'I was obviously staying in the same apartment as Fiona and Dave err they’d got a larger apartment err which meant they were on the first floor as opposed to ground floor', and later 'We were the only ones on the first floor, we had the, we had a bigger apartment than the others, err which is what Dave, Dave had originally err asked for anyway because he wanted to have err a separate bedroom I think for the girls,' or is the stress actually on the fact that you were staying on the first floor in 5H (as opposed to actually being in 5A on the ground floor)

Then we have the confusion of how to get to your apartment Dianne (note how when she describes the route down from 5H, Dianne uses the pronoun 'you'):

4078    ”If you could just begin by just describe, telling me where your apartment was in relation to the other apartments, just so that I can get a picture of it.”
 Reply    ”Right, well ours err Kate and Gerry’s was the end apartment on the ground floor and then err ......'
4078    ”How did you get to your apartment? What was the route that you had to take?”
 Reply    ”Err well we went err we generally went err right up to the end of the, we went through the front entrance if you like, not the, not the entrance that overlooked the, err pool or anything, I don’t think there was an entrance. We didn’t have a, we only had one exit really apart from the, err because veranda you couldn’t go anywhere.”
4078    ”No.”
 Reply    ”You just went out onto the balcony, err so the only exit was through, through the front door either down the lift or down the stairs which took you down into err a covered area which err there was the doors to the other apartments and then you went out from there into the car park area and then out there onto the road.”
avatar
skyrocket

Posts : 582
Reputation : 571
Join date : 2015-06-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by JRP on 18.10.16 8:48

suzyjohnson wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
suzyjohnson wrote:It could be that Catriona Baker was not lying, perhaps she just likes to be in the centre of things?
The problem with that analysis is that people who 'just' like to be at the centre of things often lie. 

To state that Madeleine was present at an alleged high tea, and that she saw Madeleine that same morning when she went sailing, if those things were not true, would not just be a lie, it would be a massive lie.

So great a lie (if it was, that is), that it led Goncalo Amaral to believe it - and therefore ignore all sorts of other potentially necessary lines of enquiry.

If it were ever proved that she lied about these two crucial alleged events on Thursday 3 May 2007, she would merit a very stiff sentence indeed for perverting the course of justice.
Sorry, yes, I just reread what I had said and it doesn't make sense.

I meant that perhaps Miss Baker was not deliberately telling lies on behalf on the McCanns but that perhaps she is the type who says things without thinking, makes things up or exaggerates, because she likes being in the centre of things.

To exaggerate is to make something appear larger, more important, overestimate beyond the point of truth. So in fact an exaggeration is technically a lie. 
If someone Makes Things Up, then that's also a lie, just a nicer way of saying so.

JRP

Posts : 491
Reputation : 436
Join date : 2016-03-07
Age : 60
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

RE;Understanding Various Motives.

Post by willowthewisp on 18.10.16 12:31

Hi Skyrocket,the only"Independent Witnesses"that are supposed to have seen Madeleine McCann was the cleaner and her daughter,Madeleine and her family were seen going up to the First floor,not sure of the day this was,but the cleaner noticed the"Shoes,lighting up" as she walked along carrying Bread on a plate.
Seems to be quite a number of Err's in 4078 statement from Diane Webster,David's Mother in law.
We know for a fact, Martin Grime's Dogs"Eddie & Keela"alerted to what they where supposed to Trace in Apartment 5A,that 15:19 markers indicated a DNA connection to Madeleine,via call me Stu(Prior) with his Faux Pau "I've arrested people" on that type DNA of Indication?
Now we also know through photographs of a large"Blue Bag,Pink Blanket"that suddenly also disappeared around the time Madeleine went missing?

willowthewisp

Posts : 1809
Reputation : 724
Join date : 2015-05-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Understanding Various Motives

Post by suzyjohnson on 18.10.16 21:48

JRP wrote:
suzyjohnson wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
suzyjohnson wrote:It could be that Catriona Baker was not lying, perhaps she just likes to be in the centre of things?
The problem with that analysis is that people who 'just' like to be at the centre of things often lie. 

To state that Madeleine was present at an alleged high tea, and that she saw Madeleine that same morning when she went sailing, if those things were not true, would not just be a lie, it would be a massive lie.

So great a lie (if it was, that is), that it led Goncalo Amaral to believe it - and therefore ignore all sorts of other potentially necessary lines of enquiry.

If it were ever proved that she lied about these two crucial alleged events on Thursday 3 May 2007, she would merit a very stiff sentence indeed for perverting the course of justice.
Sorry, yes, I just reread what I had said and it doesn't make sense.

I meant that perhaps Miss Baker was not deliberately telling lies on behalf on the McCanns but that perhaps she is the type who says things without thinking, makes things up or exaggerates, because she likes being in the centre of things.

To exaggerate is to make something appear larger, more important, overestimate beyond the point of truth. So in fact an exaggeration is technically a lie. 
If someone Makes Things Up, then that's also a lie, just a nicer way of saying so.
Yes I know. But I meant that she might not have been lying with the intention of withholding information from the police. Or, to put it a different way, she many not have any extra information relevant to the inquiry.

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1192
Reputation : 261
Join date : 2013-03-03

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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