Am I wrong? [Cuddle Cat - and the position of the door to the childrens' room]

Hi Russiandoll, I think your reasoning is very sound. Unfortunately I cannot find it in myself to feel pity for this couple, in any case it would be nothing compared to the pity they feel for themselves.
But Blacksmith called the book the longest suicide note in history and he may be right.

Very early on, Gerry was asked how long they were going to stay in Portugal. Both of them had said they were not going home without Maddie.
Gerry told the journalist that the twins weren't due to start school for another 3/4 years. Why stay in Portugal when both had said that Maddie was probably out of the country within 24 hours of her disappearance?
IMO they had an entire lifestyle in mind, they would become ambassadors for lost children,this and the fund would provide for them. They could buy a villa in the Algarve and sell the Rothley house. They thought it was a good idea, they were able to justify their actions for themselves, but it all backfired.

The publicity was engendered by them, this is another lie in the book. "no publicity'. Sky news was informed before the police were alerted. The news was on the Telegraph website by 12.01, which was a mere 2 hours after Maddie was gone.
Then there was the narrative we discussed earlier: Cuddle Cat on a high ledge (Kate is so unobservant that she confused the two bedrooms, theirs did have a ledge, the children's bedroom didn't) the shutters, the open window. The blanket on the bed. Means: Maddie has been taken!
They must have thought it was enough to tell the police these things, they certainly don't seem to have expected the investigation they got.


It is really strange, everybody knows where they were when they first heard about 9/11. In fact far more detail of your surroundings, the people there etc will stay with you than would be the case if nothing happened.
Personal disasters, car accidents, are seared into you memory. The feelings you had at the time, the wave of panice, the details of everything around you. It's all missing with the McCanns and they've been lying for a very long time now.
I think Kate started her diary many weeks after 3/5, as much as 5 or 6 weeks later. She says she took notes before that.

I would highly recommend you to read Dr. Ludke's interview, it's a topic here. Very good article.

tigger wrote:

It is really strange, everybody knows where they were when they first heard about 9/11. In fact far more detail of your surroundings, the people there etc will stay with you than would be the case if nothing happened.
Personal disasters, car accidents, are seared into you memory. The feelings you had at the time, the wave of panice, the details of everything around you. It's all missing with the McCanns and they've been lying for a very long time now.
I think Kate started her diary many weeks after 3/5, as much as 5 or 6 weeks later. She says she took notes before that.

I would highly recommend you to read Dr. Ludke's interview, it's a topic here. Very good article.

Good point, everybody knows where they were that day ( 9/11) In my country every year on that date all the newspaper online has this topic, where were you and what were you doing 9 / 11..
I also experienced a few traumatic events in my life, and I can promise you I remember every little detail from that moment , those hours and that day.. When you lie you wont and therefor the story change as it goes...

Yes Dr Ludke wrote a great article and I read it last week. I am finding it difficult to believe the whole lifestyle thing was preplanned unless the child has been abducted by arrangement, is being cared for and the entire thing is the biggest scam on earth.
It appears though I have read a lot I am not as well informed as you, could you please lets know what you believe about the disappearance? Do you think there has been a homicide or an accident and the parents have decided to cash in? I cant find words for them if that is so.
Maybe pity was the wrong word to use in this context, I had a gut feeling after reading an especially heart rending account of a dream where she is holding her missing daughter that she was recalling a more dreadful event that had actually happened. I think she is very psychologically unstable as a result of her loss I think she is bereaved and that she and her husband have maybe decided to launch something to help children as a way to assuage the guilt felt due to what happened.
It is my sincere hope that a forensic psychologist working alongside the police analyses the book because I am convinced the clues, the small overlooked detail, the final jigsaw pieces, are to be found here if it is not read and taken at face value. Omissions, distortions and lies, chapter heading, opening and closing of chapters all say something in my opinion.

russiandoll wrote:Yes Dr Ludke wrote a great article and I read it last week. I am finding it difficult to believe the whole lifestyle thing was preplanned unless the child has been abducted by arrangement, is being cared for and the entire thing is the biggest scam on earth.
It appears though I have read a lot I am not as well informed as you, could you please lets know what you believe about the disappearance? Do you think there has been a homicide or an accident and the parents have decided to cash in? I cant find words for them if that is so.
Maybe pity was the wrong word to use in this context, I had a gut feeling after reading an especially heart rending account of a dream where she is holding her missing daughter that she was recalling a more dreadful event that had actually happened. I think she is very psychologically unstable as a result of her loss I think she is bereaved and that she and her husband have maybe decided to launch something to help children as a way to assuage the guilt felt due to what happened.
It is my sincere hope that a forensic psychologist working alongside the police analyses the book because I am convinced the clues, the small overlooked detail, the final jigsaw pieces, are to be found here if it is not read and taken at face value. Omissions, distortions and lies, chapter heading, opening and closing of chapters all say something in my opinion.

There are several possibilities. For me just two.
1. It was 'letting it happen on purpose' e.g. not making an effort to avoid a likely fatal accident or giving the right treatment.
2. I don't think either of them physically killed her.I simply can't see either of them doing that. But she died probably violently and they both know exactly how and when it happened. We can't dismiss the blood (spray?) and the dogs.

Now Maddie was to go to school that year. There is a possibility that that could not be allowed because there might be a risk of her talking too much? I also think she was not a healthy child, there was something wrong with her from the start. Bags under the eyes, right side of face a little droopy. A screamer, could throw a tantrum, didn't sleep well, etc. She wasn't stunningly pretty either and Kate seems fixated on beauty.

They do not seem to feel guilty about her death, they've justified their actions. Yes, I too think that they were convinced that becoming 'celebrities' working for lost children, they were redeemed.
But Kate was unstable before the holiday and possibly for a very long time before that. Because she had no relationship to speak of with Maddie. I would think that the marriage wasn't what she hoped it would be. Children don't solve those problems. There is also little true or loving relationship with the twins IMO. Gerry would expect to be number one and did go off on golfing weekends on his own. I don't think she is grieving for Maddie at all, it wasn't a great loss to her. She is becoming more unstable because their plan failed and she doesn't like the life she is made to live instead. Basically, I suppose she doesn't know what to do and I don't think the marriage will be any help by now.

Hope I'm making sense here, but being careful. IMO definitely early date of 'accident' or death. 30th at the latest. In the topic on Burgau, which is new to me, it seems the family made a trip to Sagres, but some photos may have been taken in a house in Burgau. The blue eyeshadow photo, where she looks drugged. I really can't say what I think about that here. The Sagres trip was not mentioned in the book? They went back to PdL and I would think she died soon after that.

There was just way too much in place to quickly for it to have been an accident. 'It didn't happen like that' Kate has said, ' it happened under other circumstances, I know, I was there.' Gerry said: ' the circumstances were such that I could not physically have been there.' On record, see Dr. Roberts, Kate knows, Gerry wasn't there. Lying is so difficult!


It wasn't meant to be like this. They should be based in the Algarve, jetting around the world to help various charities, living off the Fund and their 'work' and they had made Maddie into the most beautiful and adored little girl in the world.
For one thing, I would think that Gerry wanted to be as far away from his family as possible. I find it psychologically interesting that he must have been dying his hair for a very long time, I saw a photo of him at 8 yrs. old with bright red hair. That doesn't turn brown, just goes grey earlier than other colours. So dying his hair probably from his twenties onward means for me that he distances himself from his roots. He is the best educated one of the family.
They are both social climbers but their accents let them down. I don't think they're mixing in the society where they'd like to be. (Long phone call with Cherie Blair etc. in the book, name dropping, J.K.Rowling etc. ).

We may be furious at this continuing miscarriage of justice, but they seem doomed to travel the world repeating the story by rote.
They have to promote the book/fund and this is the only way to do it. Kate doesn't dare to do the usual signing in Harrods etc. Gerry cancelled a bike ride for charity. They're afraid and I think that Clarrie left a slowly sinking ship.

Do you think its possible that Maddie never went on this holiday at all? Maddie possibly died 6 or so months previous in the UK, and needing money the Mccanns arranged with NOTW to set up an abduction story that would run and run so they all cash in? (Been done many times before with other stories)

They could have gone to PDL the previous year and got that poolside pic. Its very odd that there are virtually no pics from the holiday of Maddie, no Maddie with the twins, no Maddie with parents, infact NONE OF MADDIE WITH MUMMY KATE....just a few very suspicious odd looking ones that are highly suspicious of being photoshopped. Did GM screw up and had to go back to the UK to get the poolside pic? (forgot to take it with him)...would totally explain the fund being set up within 9 days, it was already being set up weeks/months before 3rd May 2007, be good to know the date this was first applied for. There are many other reasons why this all makes sense.....Most stories/scams are very simple, its all about making money, thats it

Its just those dogs that make this theory fall down.....

Quite possible. But not NOTW I think. They obviously sorted out how to get the publicity and the 'help'. They were well up on the laws of Portugal and had contacts/friends there.
But I'm also quite interested in the Zaival Beach and Burgau on the 30th of April. If they were at Zaival or Burgau in April that year? Never came back with Maddie? Because in the PJ files there are only four boarding passes for the McCanns on the 28th April.
Problem of course is the cadaver odour and the blood in the flat. I can't see how to fit that in.
I think Gerry, who seems to think highly of himself, was the planner. It's not proof, but when I saw him standing in front of that easel, his body language and the whole feel I got was of a plan long delayed and finally set in motion. Time to shine for him with the wider agenda. Like you, I think it was always the money, the celebrity, the lifestyle. Shame about the accents.
Without the enormous protection (and I still think it came right from the top with a few key people here and there) they'd have been sunk in days. They must have had Moriarty on speed dial.

Then 2007 was when the financial world started to crumble, the McCann story must by now have made as much money for the media as Diana did.

tigger wrote: Because in the PJ files there are only four boarding passes for the McCanns on the 28th April.
Problem of course is the cadaver odour and the blood in the flat. I can't see how to fit that in.

I didn't know this about 4 boarding passes on the 28th April....very interesting. Can you find the link to it? I'll have a search through the PJ files too

I agree the cadaver odour and the blood is the stumbling block....at the moment!

If only I could say what I know about NOTW/Sun, you would understand why I 'all but know' how they collude into making stories with one motivation in making money for all parties concerned, and this has all the hallmarks and in my eyes the proof too

jd wrote:

tigger wrote: Because in the PJ files there are only four boarding passes for the McCanns on the 28th April.
Problem of course is the cadaver odour and the blood in the flat. I can't see how to fit that in.

I didn't know this about 4 boarding passes on the 28th April....very interesting. Can you find the link to it? I'll have a search through the PJ files too

I agree the cadaver odour and the blood is the stumbling block....at the moment!

If only I could say what I know about NOTW/Sun, you would understand why I 'all but know' how they collude into making stories with one motivation in making money for all parties concerned, and this has all the hallmarks and in my eyes the proof too

There is a photograph from the PJ files which shows this, I'll find as soon as I have time.

I am so glad I joined this forum. What though can we practically do to assist in getting this case reopened and all aspects of it thoroughly investigated/reinvestigated?
You have given me a lot to think about tigger and others on this site. The whole thing has become so surreal that I wondered one evening if its the case that their lack of expected emotion [ no thats not me using myself as a yardstick and annoying Kate but psychologists' evaluation of their strange behaviour] meant that they know their daughter is fine, the coloboma was fake so she would not be recognised and that the child is alive and part of the most outrageous hoax and financial scam ever conducted.
The dogs dont lie though and this specualtion has to stop there for me.

Surely detectives will investigate all the photographs/lack of them ? If the likes of us untrained people can see their version of what happened has more holes than a colander, those trained professionals are going to be going through it all with a fine tooth comb? I will be even more ashamed of my country if this does not happen.

Something struck me as really wrong. The book's index is missing 2 of the most prominent items regarding her beloved daughter.
Cuddle Cat, the little girl's alleged favourite toy , is not indexed, although Anfield is, Anfield being a Liverpool suburb featuring in Kate's background history. Cuddle Cat features on more occasions than Anfield, is much more significant in terms of her daughter , yet has no mention as a reasonable reader would expect.

Coloboma is not indexed either, this because it is not mentioned at all in the book, not so much as a passing reference to her daughter's most distinguishing physical feature. This is incredible considering the photo on the book cover which harks back to its being the main recognition factor in her child's appearance.

It all stinks to high heaven. Please advise, what can I/we practically do to help in the fight to get this child justice?

Was looking for the passport in the PJ files, and found this

On 3rd May 2007 around 21h40 Madeleine McCann disappeared from a floor level apartment at "Aideamento Turistico Ocean Club?.
She was on holidays with her parents and at the moment of disappearance, the child was alone in the apartment.

And a little further down the page it says this
Date and Time of Disappearance: 03-05-2007 at about 22.40, Ocean Club, Praia da Luz


The twins where with her, wouldn't that be an importen factor for the police to write down? And wasn't it 2115 Jane saw the abductor? Wouldn't that also be an important fact to mention from the police (if they believed her) ? And they have two times for her disaperence, with an hour difference, none of them is 2115...

tigger wrote:

jd wrote:

tigger wrote: Because in the PJ files there are only four boarding passes for the McCanns on the 28th April.
Problem of course is the cadaver odour and the blood in the flat. I can't see how to fit that in.

I didn't know this about 4 boarding passes on the 28th April....very interesting. Can you find the link to it? I'll have a search through the PJ files too

I agree the cadaver odour and the blood is the stumbling block....at the moment!

If only I could say what I know about NOTW/Sun, you would understand why I 'all but know' how they collude into making stories with one motivation in making money for all parties concerned, and this has all the hallmarks and in my eyes the proof too

There is a photograph from the PJ files which shows this, I'll find as soon as I have time.

Can't see anything related to boarding passes but can see this which is the luggage tags for the Mccann's inbound flight. There are two larger labels dated 28/4/07 and four small ones dated 10/4/07 - not sure exactly what these are but the date is weird..

There's also this which is the flights looks like it's faxed from Faro airport. Again not sure how to read this as at first glance looks odd - the dates and flight numbers for the mccann's are different for each family member... need to study it a bit more but would be good to get opinion from anyone who knows better than me how to read this ....

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

[quote="Stewie"][quote="tigger"][quote="jd"]

tigger wrote: .

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

Why is there a questionmark on one of the Paynes child,Scarlet Payne? Is that because of the age?
And why do all of the Mccanns have different reservation dates and also different travel dates ?The paynes all got the same date on their reservation date and travel date??
And on whats look like the travel back date, Data/Voo the mccanns says 05.06.2007 and the others 05.05.2007 ??

Is this their flight dates? Or is it the booking for the OC or the restaurant? At first I asumed it was their flight dates, and then i got unsure and no I just dont know :) Anyway the dates are all different in the mccann group , and not in the other ones...

Also I appoligise if this has been discussed and clearified before :)

The blurb with the fax says it is the return flights...

Don't understand the dates either - for the group that return their dates are sequential - eg. Matthew 17/5 , E o'Brien 18/5, E o'Brien 19/5 so unless the children travelled alone it must just be some peculiarity of the printing... though don't know why.
On the outward journey there should be 17 people but there are only 15. Dianne Webster and the Oldfield child are missing from the list... Maybe they only searched for certain names which could explain Dianne's absence from the list but why is the Oldfield child not listed - the child is 19months but can't be the age because E O'Brien is 18months but is listed.

For the group that returned, again Dianne Webster is not listed. Russell O'Brien isn't listed so not clear when he returned. The Oldfield child is still not listed but instead we have "2 bebes" - 2 babies? So Jane Tanner returns with her two children but Russell doesn't. Then the Oldfield/Mamphilly's return with 2 babies? Where did this extra baby come from?

Quote:
Fax

To: Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida

From: SPI Faro Airport Inspector Nunes Barroso

Date: 28-09-2007

Subject: McCann Group Travel

I attach the table relating to the return of the McCann group. In some situations it was not possible to determine the number of suitcases or their weight as their airline companies do not have a register for these items.

With best regards

Inspector Barroso

Table can be seen in here

(The group travelled with 7 suitcases) Quote

Stewie wrote:The blurb with the fax says it is the return flights...

Don't understand the dates either - for the group that return their dates are sequential - eg. Matthew 17/5 , E o'Brien 18/5, E o'Brien 19/5 so unless the children travelled alone it must just be some peculiarity of the printing... though don't know why.

Think I can explain the dates and flight numbers. Suspect this info was done in Excel spreadsheet and in excel if you type a number and drag the cell down to fill in the cells beneath with the same info, excel can fill i t in as a series rather than just repeat the cell contents. so if the cell is a date 28/4/07 and you fill in calls below it can fill as a series so you will get 29/4/07 , 30/4/07 etc . it has done the same with flight numbers - w5531 for gerry gets filled as a series so becomes ww5532, ww5533, ww5534 etc.

Russell's missing from these return flights though the phone records say he stops pinging in portugal on 17 may when he is presumed to have returned home.

Stewie wrote:

Stewie wrote:The blurb with the fax says it is the return flights...

Don't understand the dates either - for the group that return their dates are sequential - eg. Matthew 17/5 , E o'Brien 18/5, E o'Brien 19/5 so unless the children travelled alone it must just be some peculiarity of the printing... though don't know why.

Think I can explain the dates and flight numbers. Suspect this info was done in Excel spreadsheet and in excel if you type a number and drag the cell down to fill in the cells beneath with the same info, excel can fill i t in as a series rather than just repeat the cell contents. so if the cell is a date 28/4/07 and you fill in calls below it can fill as a series so you will get 29/4/07 , 30/4/07 etc . it has done the same with flight numbers - w5531 for gerry gets filled as a series so becomes ww5532, ww5533, ww5534 etc.

Russell's missing from these return flights though the phone records say he stops pinging in portugal on 17 may when he is presumed to have returned home.

That could be it if it wasnt for the fact that the numbers goes 17-18-19-20-22-21...on the Tanner/obrien/oldfield..

Moa wrote:

That could be it if it wasnt for the fact that the numbers goes 17-18-19-20-22-21...on the Tanner/obrien/oldfield..

Yeah thought about that.. Think that the Mamphilly record was moved to be last afterwards. For the returning group they were all on the same flight into gatwick except for Rachel who went via Monarch to Luton. So think she was moved to be the last record so the others were grouped together and all have the same comment in the ob5 column.

Stewie wrote:

Moa wrote:

That could be it if it wasnt for the fact that the numbers goes 17-18-19-20-22-21...on the Tanner/obrien/oldfield..

Yeah thought about that.. Think that the Mamphilly record was moved to be last afterwards. For the returning group they were all on the same flight into gatwick except for Rachel who went via Monarch to Luton. So think she was moved to be the last record so the others were grouped together and all have the same comment in the ob5 column.

If this is what they did, why hasn't the same happened on the Payne booking? they are the same date, and why has the mccann travelback date 05.06.2007?
And also why are Kate and Gerry signed up with full names(including Middle name) and not the children?

Moa wrote:

Stewie wrote:

Moa wrote:

That could be it if it wasnt for the fact that the numbers goes 17-18-19-20-22-21...on the Tanner/obrien/oldfield..

Yeah thought about that.. Think that the Mamphilly record was moved to be last afterwards. For the returning group they were all on the same flight into gatwick except for Rachel who went via Monarch to Luton. So think she was moved to be the last record so the others were grouped together and all have the same comment in the ob5 column.

If this is what they did, why hasn't the same happened on the Payne booking? they are the same date, and why has the mccann travelback date 05.06.2007?
And also why are Kate and Gerry signed up with full names(including Middle name) and not the children?

don't know with the Payne booking - maybe those were copied and pasted. Excel definitely behaves in this way as it happens to me all the time and drives me nuts. Think it more likely than children travelling on their own...even though the group seemed to think the children were fine to be left alone in unlocked apartments....


It definitely doesn't explain the travel back date for mccann's that looks like 5 june.. or why the names aren't in full. or why Russell is missing or who the 2 babies are.. still lots unanswered as usual...

Stewie wrote:

Moa wrote:

Stewie wrote:

Moa wrote:

That could be it if it wasnt for the fact that the numbers goes 17-18-19-20-22-21...on the Tanner/obrien/oldfield..

Yeah thought about that.. Think that the Mamphilly record was moved to be last afterwards. For the returning group they were all on the same flight into gatwick except for Rachel who went via Monarch to Luton. So think she was moved to be the last record so the others were grouped together and all have the same comment in the ob5 column.

If this is what they did, why hasn't the same happened on the Payne booking? they are the same date, and why has the mccann travelback date 05.06.2007?
And also why are Kate and Gerry signed up with full names(including Middle name) and not the children?

don't know with the Payne booking - maybe those were copied and pasted. Excel definitely behaves in this way as it happens to me all the time and drives me nuts. Think it more likely than children travelling on their own...even though the group seemed to think the children were fine to be left alone in unlocked apartments....


It definitely doesn't explain the travel back date for mccann's that looks like 5 june.. or why the names aren't in full. or why Russell is missing or who the 2 babies are.. still lots unanswered as usual...

It happens to me to in Excell...And maybe that is why, still as you point out, still lots unanswered as usul, creche records, booking and so on...And funny how an extra kid keeps popping up here and there..Also a few sentence in her book I found strange :
The party would consist of David, Fiona, Lilly, who was two, and Scarlett nearly a year old. Matt and Rachel and their toddler Grace, Jane and Russel with Ella who, coming up to four, was almost the same age as Madeleine, and Evie, another toddler, the five of us and and Fi's mum Dianne.

See how she describes everyone with name, age, and then suddenly in between "another toddler, "

I think that this statement is simply a little ambiguous. I take it to mean that Evie and "another toddler" are one and the same. The other toddler in question is Grace Oldfield - Kate is linking children of about the same age as these two are.



Something that good old Carter-Ruck failed to clarify but, compared to their letting the gem on page 129 go unamended, it's only a minor lapse.

russiandoll wrote:I am so glad I joined this forum. What though can we practically do to assist in getting this case reopened and all aspects of it thoroughly investigated/reinvestigated?
You have given me a lot to think about tigger and others on this site. The whole thing has become so surreal that I wondered one evening if its the case that their lack of expected emotion [ no thats not me using myself as a yardstick and annoying Kate but psychologists' evaluation of their strange behaviour] meant that they know their daughter is fine, the coloboma was fake so she would not be recognised and that the child is alive and part of the most outrageous hoax and financial scam ever conducted.
The dogs dont lie though and this specualtion has to stop there for me.

Surely detectives will investigate all the photographs/lack of them ? If the likes of us untrained people can see their version of what happened has more holes than a colander, those trained professionals are going to be going through it all with a fine tooth comb? I will be even more ashamed of my country if this does not happen.

Something struck me as really wrong. The book's index is missing 2 of the most prominent items regarding her beloved daughter.
Cuddle Cat, the little girl's alleged favourite toy , is not indexed, although Anfield is, Anfield being a Liverpool suburb featuring in Kate's background history. Cuddle Cat features on more occasions than Anfield, is much more significant in terms of her daughter , yet has no mention as a reasonable reader would expect.

Coloboma is not indexed either, this because it is not mentioned at all in the book, not so much as a passing reference to her daughter's most distinguishing physical feature. This is incredible considering the photo on the book cover which harks back to its being the main recognition factor in her child's appearance.

It all stinks to high heaven. Please advise, what can I/we practically do to help in the fight to get this child justice?

You're right, we're champing at the bit to DO something.

Well, have you gone through the 'We've been Carter Rucked' topic on page 2 of the debate section? That shows you how they're persecuting Tony Bennett.
I do my bit by telling all and sundry here, warn them about the facebook page etc. Most people are just not interested.
But when you get a good idea, send it as a message for advice first to one of the moderators. We've just had an influx of 'guests' on the poll.

What we can do is get the petition signed by as many people as possible. I'm working on that right now. (petition topic)
I'd be willing to print and push leaflets through people's doors, but here it's useless. Although - I'm going to the anglican church next week, see if I can evangelise?

You can send a letter to SY of course or an email. There is a topic on how to do that.
I'm working on one, trying to keep it short so it will get read. Really hard!


Keep posting, because I think the Burgau and Zaival beach are very intriguing.