Re: Norwegian ex-military detective claims to have solved Madeleine case

by Honesty 26.06.24 22:55

I think it would be interesting to know where they all are now and where they are working, etc. Not that we are all going to turn up at their doors with flaming torches but why should they be allowed to slip into anonymity?

by Cake Lover 26.06.24 23:00

They were never approached, were they? No reporters camped on their lawns, or trained long lens cameras on them., both of which normally happen to people who are involved in horrible events. They have been treated with kid gloves.

by Honesty 26.06.24 23:04

So true. All part of the same big cover-up.

by Nina 26.06.24 23:10

Honesty wrote:I think it would be interesting to know where they all are now and where they are working, etc. Not that we are all going to turn up at their doors with flaming torches but why should they be allowed to slip into anonymity?

Not sure how up to date this is as I have noticed basic google research on members of the tapas group meets up with either not a lot or very little,

https://kingstonhospital.nhs.uk/consultant/oldfield-dr-matthew/

Nice picture of David the finger sucker,

https://www.ramsayhealth.co.uk/specialists/mr-david-payne

by sandancer 26.06.24 23:13

I did read somewhere Kate was now working with people with dementia .
Poor souls haven't they got enough to handle without having " poor me " Kate thrust upon them !

Having worked with those with dementia Alzheimer's she's the last person I would want alongside me !

by Nina 26.06.24 23:23

sandancer wrote:I did read somewhere Kate was now working with people with dementia .
Poor souls haven't they got enough to handle without having " poor me " Kate thrust upon them !

Having worked with those with dementia Alzheimer's she's the last person I would want alongside me !

I am caring for my husband who has dementia along with other comorbidities and no way would I want her anywhere near him.

by crusader 26.06.24 23:50

Both Oldfield and Payne working in private hospitals.

by Liz Eagles 27.06.24 11:58

Nina wrote:
Honesty wrote:
crusader wrote:I agree, they were told not to show emotion by crying or looking upset., so they went completely the other way.
They have done themselves no favours by acting the way they did.
It looks to me anyway, they portray themselves more upset now than what they were then, but it's too late.
Even if told to hide their emotions, which seems odd to me, I cannot see how any parents who had had a child go missing would be able to do so. Surely, they would at the very least be struggling to contain their emotions.
Would they even have been told to behave like that? It is impossible to not show intense emotion even if you tried as it is a natural function that overwhelms you. Like grief after a great loss it is like a wave that just washes over you at the most unexpected time. Everyone here in this place must have experienced that in their lives and felt the helplessness.

Told by whom is a more pertinent question.

by crusader 27.06.24 12:10

Probably by the same person who told them what they did was in line with good parenting. laugh

by Liz Eagles 27.06.24 12:18

crusader wrote:Probably by the same person who told them what they did was in line with good parenting.

That advice resulted in Gerry McCann writing a blog which made little emotional sense.

by Paddingtom 28.06.24 10:32

Ive finished the second part of the book (not the first) and I have a few observations.   It has already been mentioned that there is a lot of repetition. but dont let that put you off. It has the feel of a novel which is perhaps why I struggled with it a bit as I only read non-fiction because I dont like the words for words sake nature of novels. That said, it is well researched and thought through and is facinating to see how Bernt decides what actions to take and how he carries them out. His style is perhaps a good tactic. Non-fiction readers will read it for the information and novel readers will read it for the story. its worth it.
I dont want to spoil the surprises so I will confine myself to what is already known. He feels the Smith sighting was some Random with his child which I really struggle with. The police would have checked all the creches and identified him and/or he would have come forward himself. Even Tannerman was identified eventually and he was imaginary!! so, we will have to agree to disagree on that one.

As is known, i.e. the subject of his book, he believes MM was buried in the hills above PDL. Ive always believed she would have been buried at sea as anything else would be insane. But he provides a compelling case for his theory and I am willing to accept I was wrong and she is indeed buried as he says. Its still insane!!!

He also chooses 2nd May as the disaster day for reasons he explains. That is another one that divides people and it will be down to your own beliefs whether you run with his theory or have one of your own.

There is something in the book which I do find facinating. I cant say what it is for obvious reasons, hopefully those reading it will twig, but he makes a statement which I am hoping and praying is a deliberate lie on his part. If so, it is brilliant. Now, I could be totally wrong and the stament he made is truthful and theres nothing to see here, but Im desperately hoping he is lying. If so, it will have far reaching consequences. Its also possible that I am totally barking up the wrong
tree. If it ever comes out, I will confess that is what I was aluding to.

Anyway, all in all I would urge you to read it. If you struggle with its bulk you can seperate it into more manageable parts, but mine is still intact and Ive managed without problems...and I do have a lot of problems with my hands, so it can be done.   Enjoy.

by deepeepee 28.06.24 10:56

Paddingtom wrote:
.....There is something in the book which I do find facinating. I cant say what it is for obvious reasons, hopefully those reading it will twig, but he makes a statement which I am hoping and praying is a deliberate lie on his part. If so, it is brilliant. Now, I could be totally wrong and the stament he made is truthful and theres nothing to see here, but Im desperately hoping he is lying. If so, it will have far reaching consequences. Its also possible that I am totally barking up the wrong
tree. If it ever comes out, I will confess that is what I was aluding to. ....

Now that is a big tease big grin

I do not have the book so like many others, I imagine, will have to remain mystified.

Not sure why you can't say what it is or what the obvious reasons are but I trust you know what you are thinking here. it is just making me want to order the book now.
Are you on commission, by any chance? big grin

by **Jill Havern** 28.06.24 11:03

Yes, spit it out Paddingtom bring it on

Or, at least, tell me which page it's on.

by crusader 28.06.24 11:21

Just to throw a spanner in the works, B Stellander thinks the Smith sighting was some random with a child.
I read a statement of one of the nannies, I thought it was C Pennington? that there was one child left at the creche waiting to be picked up when the alarm was raised and she had to wait until the child had gone before she could join the search.
Could this person have been Smithman taking his child home?
But I'm sure G Amaral would have spoken to him.

by crusader 28.06.24 12:36

It was Jacqueline Williams who said it not C Pennington.

by Cake Lover 28.06.24 14:43

deepeepee wrote:
Paddingtom wrote:
.....There is something in the book which I do find facinating. I cant say what it is for obvious reasons, hopefully those reading it will twig, but he makes a statement which I am hoping and praying is a deliberate lie on his part. If so, it is brilliant. Now, I could be totally wrong and the stament he made is truthful and theres nothing to see here, but Im desperately hoping he is lying. If so, it will have far reaching consequences. Its also possible that I am totally barking up the wrong
tree. If it ever comes out, I will confess that is what I was aluding to. ....
Now that is a big tease
I do not have the book so like many others, I imagine, will have to remain mystified.

Not sure why you can't say what it is or what the obvious reasons are but I trust you know what you are thinking here. it is just making me want to order the book now.
Are you on commission, by any chance?

I'm guessing that the possible lie is designed to prompt a reaction. A double bluff? Will the main players or the Nuggets have to react whether it's a lie, or even if it isn't? This is intriguing.

by Ladyinred 28.06.24 15:09

deepeepee wrote:
Paddingtom wrote:
.....There is something in the book which I do find facinating. I cant say what it is for obvious reasons, hopefully those reading it will twig, but he makes a statement which I am hoping and praying is a deliberate lie on his part. If so, it is brilliant. Now, I could be totally wrong and the stament he made is truthful and theres nothing to see here, but Im desperately hoping he is lying. If so, it will have far reaching consequences. Its also possible that I am totally barking up the wrong
tree. If it ever comes out, I will confess that is what I was aluding to. ....
Now that is a big tease
I do not have the book so like many others, I imagine, will have to remain mystified.

Not sure why you can't say what it is or what the obvious reasons are but I trust you know what you are thinking here. it is just making me want to order the book now.
Are you on commission, by any chance?

I don't think he would deliberately lie in the book. Why would he? It would undermine his credibility, IMO, when the book's purpose is to expose all those other lies.

by Cake Lover 28.06.24 15:11

Perhaps there is more explanation for this, deeper into the book?

by Ladyinred 28.06.24 15:14

Explanation for what?

by Cake Lover 28.06.24 15:21

The 'lie', and why he put it there. Paddington considers it to be brilliant, if it is indeed a lie, and says it will have far reaching consequences. I don't know what the consequences will be if the statement turns out to be true. Paddington does say that he could be barking up the wrong tree.

by Ladyinred 28.06.24 15:26

Jill Havern wrote:Yes, spit it out Paddingtom

Or, at least, tell me which page it's on.

Here's a clue: it's in the second part of the book

by **Jill Havern** 28.06.24 15:42

Ladyinred wrote:
Jill Havern wrote:Yes, spit it out Paddingtom

Or, at least, tell me which page it's on.
Here's a clue: it's in the second part of the book

Taxi for Miss Ladyinred !
lol4

by **sharonl** 28.06.24 22:55

Ladyinred wrote:
Jill Havern wrote:Yes, spit it out Paddingtom

Or, at least, tell me which page it's on.
Here's a clue: it's in the second part of the book

Oh C'mon

Chapter at least please reading

It's a big book - have a heart flowers

by Nina 28.06.24 23:11

sharonl wrote:
Ladyinred wrote:
Jill Havern wrote:Yes, spit it out Paddingtom

Or, at least, tell me which page it's on.
Here's a clue: it's in the second part of the book

Oh C'mon

Chapter at least please

It's a big book - have a heart

May I ask you sharonl, did you have to pay postage? I have tried so many times to order it and then I get an email to say it is still in my basket and offers free postage. Then I go back to the sales pages free p&p then lo and behold what is probably the last page before payment I am asked to choose between two delivery methods both expensive. Ok it is expensive to parcel and send something so heavy but I am loathe to pay when offered free p&p.

by Paddingtom Yesterday at 6:46

Oh crikey everyone Im so sorry to have caused such excitement. I honestly thought everyone would just think "interesting...wonder what it is...."

I am terrified of trying to give more information incase I drop a clanger and it is identified.....to EVERYONE.

how about if I tell one person what it is and then they can at least agree it is weird, or tell me Im being an idiot and theres nothing to see here?

As forum owner, Could I speak privately to you Jill in anyway?

Everyone else, please calm down....Im probably just being stupid.

Cake Lover....you are right

Log in for more topics