Re: How Maddie's creche attendance was "arranged"

by soulthief 01.12.10 18:45

Thanks I thought that was what was being said but wasn't sure.. Your analysis perfectly first the bill for me, usually I find a loop hole or something that contradicts, i think you are right about the timing & creche records . roses

To anyone who may have an answer/suggestion..why would anyone plan to kill their child? That's bloody sick, I just about handled an accident or neglect. The only small mercy here is she is not in the hands of paedo's.

by Guest 01.12.10 18:56

well this case seems to be all about money in some respects, there is no denying that if Madeleine is dead they have made a lot of money from that. Some people also kill children in snuff movies etc.

by **Tony Bennett** 01.12.10 19:01

I sent round my long summary of the Naylor thread to a few contacts.

One of the most respected on the Madeleine forums over the past few years came back with these comments (unedited):

+++++++++++++++++

QUOTE

Many thanks for leting me see the Naylor Summary document.

My first reaction is that it is a serious offence against the law of Occams's razor.

It is far too complicated, and involves far too many people in a criminal conspiracy covering a very long time.

And almost all of those people would have to know almost all of the details to make it work, and then remain silent for nearly 4 years.

It is the sort of thing people read in Agatha Christie, or more recently PD James.

Very involved, many twists and turns, lots of characters each with their own personal agendas and we have to be told the history of each character to pad out the novel, and to make it all fit together.

People with the same names, McCann , Nailor, coincidences in time and space, and so on

For that reason alone, I don't buy it.

Child falls off sofa, bangs head, dies, parents panic, hide body, and invent cover story is not so interesting, but is sadly more plausible, and has happened before.

But it is interesting nonetheless, and I shall re-read it a couple of times more.

UNQUOTE

by Cheshire Cat 01.12.10 19:23

Tony Bennett wrote:It is far too complicated, and involves far too many people in a criminal conspiracy covering a very long time.

And almost all of those people would have to know almost all of the details to make it work, and then remain silent for nearly 4 years.

It is the sort of thing people read in Agatha Christie, or more recently PD James.

Very involved, many twists and turns, lots of characters each with their own personal agendas and we have to be told the history of each character to pad out the novel, and to make it all fit together.

UNQUOTE

Now this expresses how I feel about the thread as a whole. I think that the thread adds weight to the theory that Madeleine died before 3 May 2007 and exposes further measures that were being taken to cover-up the death e.g. GM signing in Elizabeth Naylor and copying Robert Naylors signature.

I agree with the poster quoted by Tony that the simple explaination, whilst dull, is probably the most likely.

It may have been an accident but the Gaspar statements and the references to David Payne from Goncalo Amaral perhaps point to a more violent and sinister ending to Madeleines life.

by soulthief 01.12.10 19:38

Cherry wrote:well this case seems to be all about money in some respects, there is no denying that if Madeleine is dead they have made a lot of money from that. Some people also kill children in snuff movies etc.

Re snuff movie, surely not a parent? I find it hard to fathom from anyone but a bloody parent? To the money answer, repeat of what I just said re parents at this kind of caper, so if we go with either motive, how many of them were in on it from the outset? Did the extended family know or are they being played like the rest of us..I know no one has the answers, how could we but, I'm saying, oh I dont know what I am saying. I am a bit aghast tbh.

by littlepixie 01.12.10 21:14

There was an excellent post by Midas on MCF regarding dodgy forms of IVF and DNA. I didnt understand all of it but I got the gist. I cannot understand why the DNA matched then it was from more than one person. I still believe there is a chance that IVF had something to do with what happened to Maddie.
I can't believe she was taken on holiday to be "done away with". Not in that crowded place. But people do do the weirdest things. I know that many children are unwanted by their parents. If Maddie was created using a form of IVF that is unacceptable, that could not be hidden forever, i.e. it may have come to light in the future via a blood-test or something making adopting her out impossible, then maybe pre-meditation could be a possibility.

The only other form of premeditation I can think of is the staging of the abduction after an accident/overdose/abuse.
It looks like Gerry was forging the creche records from just after they got there. I think he should be taken in for questioning on this point. There again if Mr Naylor denies things would it be back to square one?

by kikoraton 01.12.10 21:45

Quote: People with the same names, McCann , Nailor, coincidences in time and space, and so on

For that reason alone, I don't buy it.
I don't know what your friend means by this, Tony! If I knew who he/she was, I might have an opinion on his/her opinion. As for:
Quote: Child falls off sofa, bangs head, dies, parents panic, hide body, and invent cover story is not so interesting, but is sadly more plausible, and has happened before.
I got away from MCF forum to avoid having to hear any more of this nonsense!!!!

by soulthief 01.12.10 21:52

kikoraton wrote:Quote: People with the same names, McCann , Nailor, coincidences in time and space, and so on

For that reason alone, I don't buy it.
I don't know what your friend means by this, Tony! If I knew who he/she was, I might have an opinion on his/her opinion. As for:
Quote: Child falls off sofa, bangs head, dies, parents panic, hide body, and invent cover story is not so interesting, but is sadly more plausible, and has happened before.
I got away from MCF forum to avoid having to hear any more of this nonsense!!!!

if it was an accident like banged her head the McCanns would have looked sorry and guilty, instead they looked..god forbid dare I say glad! The thing is unless it was planned they had very little time to cover up as they did...and there is the leaflets that Amaral suspected were brought with them to Portugal..and then just happening to be able to get people to help..its too well oiled.

by littlepixie 01.12.10 21:54

I agree they looked glad. As if a problem had been sorted out.

by soulthief 01.12.10 22:12

littlepixie wrote:I agree they looked glad. As if a problem had been sorted out.

She was a cute little thing, its very sad, especially when you think of all the women desperate to concieve or the families who lose their children.

by coppernob 01.12.10 22:29

I've always believed whatever happened to Madeleine happened before the 3rd May and I go along with another child being signed in instead of her, weather the parent knew of the substitute child or not I don't know.
I also don't think the children were left alone, this was an excuse. I used to lurk way back on Mumsnet and read the threads and remember the discussions for and agaisnt going on holiday and leaving children alone in their rooms, where the idea came from and why they had so much support because a lot of Jane and Kate's fellow Mumsnetters thought there for the grace of God go I?
I also think that RM was tricked into helping out with an empty property to store Madeleine in once she had died perhaps?
I can't see this being pre planned not as in pre meditated killing before the holiday,planned in as much as after her accidental death, yes but not cold blooded murder.

by littlepixie 01.12.10 22:41

If the Gaspars were right, if having a CATS number is not routine, then an "accident" could have happened during a pre-meditated act.
I believe neglect was the smokescreen but I think it is back-firing. All the comments on recent news stories have shown that people are getting increasingly angry about the publicised neglect. Much more so than in 2007.

I hate to say it on here but dodgy IVF or paedophillia would be two things that could rope in other people. I can't think of anything else that would.

by coppernob 01.12.10 22:45

Hi Littlepixie, the IVF link I could go along with, I still think this was a busman's holiday and the medical records were withheld for a reason
Could Gerry have a CATS number just because he has reported abuse, therefore been entered into the system and a number created ? I know this happens with other similar systems.

by soulthief 01.12.10 22:45

littlepixie wrote:If the Gaspars were right, if having a CATS number is not routine, then an "accident" could have happened during a pre-meditated act.
I believe neglect was the smokescreen but I think it is back-firing. All the comments on recent news stories have shown that people are getting increasingly angry about the publicised neglect. Much more so than in 2007.

I hate to say it on here but dodgy IVF or paedophillia would be two things that could rope in other people. I can't think of anything else that would.

why the 'dodgy' IVF? what could be dodgy about it..I have always thought maybe paedophilia not just because of The Gaspers statements but because I couldnt think why else Gordon brown and co would be so helpful otherwise. I have though mind you maybe an accident but they were afraid of what the autopsy might find re long term sexual abuse, it makes me want to weep.

by soulthief 01.12.10 22:46

coppernob wrote:Hi Littlepixie, the IVF link I could go along with, I still think this was a busman's holiday and the medical records were withheld for a reason
Could Gerry have a CATS number just because he has reported abuse, therefore been entered into the system and a number created ? I know this happens with other similar systems.

what is a cats number please?

by littlepixie 02.12.10 0:02

[/quote]
why the 'dodgy' IVF? what could be dodgy about it..[/quote]

I have read that there are certain things that can be done to make one egg go further (laymans view). It is not allowed, but can be done. Something about embryo twinning. I can well imagine if some sort of procedure had been used that is frowned upon or not allowed, then I suppose it could be a motive. If what they got was not what they wanted.
Sounds far fetched but I am just thinking of reasons for pre-med.

by **Jill Havern** 02.12.10 7:08

coppernob wrote:I can't see this being pre planned not as in pre meditated killing before the holiday,planned in as much as after her accidental death, yes but not cold blooded murder.

I wish I could see it that way, but if your child had been abducted by a paedophile or she'd had a tragic accident which resulted in her untimely death at just three years old...would you be able to walk around the streets like this days afterwards? These people do not look like they've just lost their tiny child to a paedophile or tragic accident. To me they look like they've lost a "very difficult Madeleine". Shocked

littlepixie wrote:I agree they looked glad. As if a problem had been sorted out.

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

soulthief wrote:what is a cats number please?

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

by Cheshire Cat 02.12.10 7:28

littlepixie wrote:

why the 'dodgy' IVF? what could be dodgy about it..[/quote]

I have read that there are certain things that can be done to make one egg go further (laymans view). It is not allowed, but can be done. Something about embryo twinning. I can well imagine if some sort of procedure had been used that is frowned upon or not allowed, then I suppose it could be a motive. If what they got was not what they wanted.
Sounds far fetched but I am just thinking of reasons for pre-med.

I have seen photographs of the McCann's from 4 May 2007 where they, particularly Gerry if I remember correctly, do look like parents who have suffered a traumatic event. The grief seems real and raw in these photographs. However, you are correct, in a matter of days they were smiling again.

Perhaps a sense of relief and also a result of emergency psycotherapy from the Skipton Crisis Centre who were sent out to Praira da Luz within days of the disappearance?

As time progressed, Kate McCann looked as if something was gnawing away inside her. Living the lie and being unable to truly grieve was suggested.

I don't know how to find those very early photographs, but if you haven't seen them you may well be surprised to see the McCann's in that state.

by soulthief 02.12.10 7:37

Cheshire Cat wrote:
littlepixie wrote:
why the 'dodgy' IVF? what could be dodgy about it..

I have read that there are certain things that can be done to make one egg go further (laymans view). It is not allowed, but can be done. Something about embryo twinning. I can well imagine if some sort of procedure had been used that is frowned upon or not allowed, then I suppose it could be a motive. If what they got was not what they wanted.
Sounds far fetched but I am just thinking of reasons for pre-med.

I have seen photographs of the McCann's from 4 May 2007 where they, particularly Gerry if I remember correctly, do look like parents who have suffered a traumatic event. The grief seems real and raw in these photographs. However, you are correct, in a matter of days they were smiling again.

Perhaps a sense of relief and also a result of emergency psycotherapy from the Skipton Crisis Centre who were sent out to Praira da Luz within days of the disappearance?

As time progressed, Kate McCann looked as if something was gnawing away inside her. Living the lie and being unable to truly grieve was suggested.

I don't know how to find those very early photographs, but if you haven't seen them you may well be surprised to see the McCann's in that state.[/quote]

I have seen the pics you mean.. I think but that could be more the stress of the lie, can we find these pics anyone?

by soulthief 02.12.10 7:40

Get 'em Gonçalo wrote:
coppernob wrote:I can't see this being pre planned not as in pre meditated killing before the holiday,planned in as much as after her accidental death, yes but not cold blooded murder.

I wish I could see it that way, but if your child had been abducted by a paedophile or she'd had a tragic accident which resulted in her untimely death at just three years old...would you be able to walk around the streets like this days afterwards? These people do not look like they've just lost their tiny child to a paedophile or tragic accident. To me they look like they've lost a "very difficult Madeleine".

littlepixie wrote:I agree they looked glad. As if a problem had been sorted out.

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

soulthief wrote:what is a cats number please?

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

Thanks Jill roses

so does this mean Gerry is known for some kind of sex offence regarding children?

by Guest 02.12.10 8:43

littlepixie wrote:
Stella wrote:Tony, did you happen to keep a post by someone on the old 3a's, I'm not sure who posted it though, but they had found a web site that Malinka or Murat had created I believe, advertising the arranging of holiday rentals. Does that ring any bells with you?

I remember something like that Stella - and they had key words like girl, boy, sexy etc.

Yes littlepixie, that is the one. thumbsup

Tony: Thanks for the info on Romigen, but it's not that. Littlepixie remembers it exactly. It was a site offering appartments in very good locations and it had some very dubious key words. I remember at the time reading it and thinking, if it was good for children, why did it have to say, good for boys and girls !!!

by Daoud 02.12.10 9:16

Get 'em Gonçalo wrote:
coppernob wrote:I can't see this being pre planned not as in pre meditated killing before the holiday,planned in as much as after her accidental death, yes but not cold blooded murder.

I wish I could see it that way, but if your child had been abducted by a paedophile or she'd had a tragic accident which resulted in her untimely death at just three years old...would you be able to walk around the streets like this days afterwards? These people do not look like they've just lost their tiny child to a paedophile or tragic accident. To me they look like they've lost a "very difficult Madeleine".

littlepixie wrote:I agree they looked glad. As if a problem had been sorted out.

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

soulthief wrote:what is a cats number please?

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

I agree with Littlepixie - in their first press conference early on the 4th of May they did look more than worried, even (imo) shifty? But above all they seemed scared, which I suppose is a natural enough reaction for anyone in their position, but their appearance and behaviour at that conference didn't seem quite right to me, though I can't say exactly why.

If the 'abduction' story was a premeditated one, then that first press conference would have been the curtain raiser for their drama and I can understand that they would have 'first night' nerves - after all much depended on it; but after a few days their story had been accepted and clearly by the time these photos were taken all the darker emotions displayed on the 4th had been replaced by those shown above.

I find this very difficult to square with abduction, accidental death, or cold blooded murder which is one of the reasons why I think it possible the whole thing may well have been preplanned, that Madeleine is not dead, and that the McC's have rid themselves of a child who they found to be a blight rather than a blessing in their lives...

Also, seen from this perspective premeditation is much more believable, in that all that was premeditated was the abduction story and its release to the world - no murder and no killing, just the disappearance of a 'difficult' daugher...

by **Jill Havern** 02.12.10 9:31

Daoud wrote:I find this very difficult to square with abduction, accidental death, or cold blooded murder which is one of the reasons why I think it possible the whole thing may well have been preplanned, that Madeleine is not dead, and that the McC's have rid themselves of a child who they found to be a blight rather than a blessing in their lives...

Also, seen from this perspective premeditation is much more believable, in that all that was premeditated was the abduction story and its release to the world - no murder and no killing, just the disappearance of a 'difficult' daugher...

That's exactly what I used to think until Eddie and Keela came along. How do they fit into your way of thinking?

by soulthief 02.12.10 9:33

Daoud wrote:
Get 'em Gonçalo wrote:
coppernob wrote:I can't see this being pre planned not as in pre meditated killing before the holiday,planned in as much as after her accidental death, yes but not cold blooded murder.

I wish I could see it that way, but if your child had been abducted by a paedophile or she'd had a tragic accident which resulted in her untimely death at just three years old...would you be able to walk around the streets like this days afterwards? These people do not look like they've just lost their tiny child to a paedophile or tragic accident. To me they look like they've lost a "very difficult Madeleine".

littlepixie wrote:I agree they looked glad. As if a problem had been sorted out.

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

soulthief wrote:what is a cats number please?

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

I agree with Littlepixie - in their first press conference early on the 4th of May they did look more than worried, even (imo) shifty? But above all they seemed scared, which I suppose is a natural enough reaction for anyone in their position, but their appearance and behaviour at that conference didn't seem quite right to me, though I can't say exactly why.

If the 'abduction' story was a premeditated one, then that first press conference would have been the curtain raiser for their drama and I can understand that they would have 'first night' nerves - after all much depended on it; but after a few days their story had been accepted and clearly by the time these photos were taken all the darker emotions displayed on the 4th had been replaced by those shown above.

I find this very difficult to square with abduction, accidental death, or cold blooded murder which is one of the reasons why I think it possible the whole thing may well have been preplanned, that Madeleine is not dead, and that the McC's have rid themselves of a child who they found to be a blight rather than a blessing in their lives...

Also, seen from this perspective premeditation is much more believable, in that all that was premeditated was the abduction story and its release to the world - no murder and no killing, just the disappearance of a 'difficult' daugher...

I like the the thought of Madeleine being alive but its highly unlikely, forget the blood splatter and the cadaverine..where would she be? who would have her and how would they have found this person? on the internet ?

by Guest 02.12.10 9:38

kikoraton wrote:
Sorry to have made you cry, Stella, but I don't quite understand why. Could you explain, please, in case there has been a misunderstanding?

The realisation that this could have been planned in the UK, made my heart sink to an all time low. It's nothing you have done kiko, don't worry roses

it's just a very harsh wake up call to the real word sadly.

Up until now I had always thought we were dealing with an accident in 5a and a cover-up. There is a very sensitive side to me where cruelty to children and animals are concerned. I have always said that if I ever won a huge amount of money one day, I would build some happy-homes for all unwanted children and animals, so that they could all live together under one roof.

So the thought of anyone planning weeks or months in advance, to end a childs life, will take a little time for me to come to terms with. sad