New Series of Videos - MCANN 'LIES' #1 Front Door or Patio Doors

by **HiDeHo** 06.08.11 1:54

I am working on creating videos for Pat Brown interviews.

I believe she is able to give some credibility to the belief of Madeleine dying.

It's a major undertaking but in the meanwhile I have decided to create mini videos of the MCCANN 'LIES'

Here is #1 Front Door or Patio Door?

Any suggestions for future videos welcomed

by ROSA 06.08.11 2:13

The coloboma

by jd 06.08.11 2:22

KMs Book FRIDAY 4 MAY
Friday 4 May. Our first day without Madeleine. As soon as it was light Gerry and I resumed our search. We went up and down
roads we’d never seen before, having barely left the Ocean Club complex all week. We jumped over walls and raked through
undergrowth. We looked in ditches and holes.

She forgot she had already admitted on camera she NEVER searched for Madeleine.

by steevo1962 16.10.11 22:21

Could the raking through undergrowth be the reason for the scent the cadavar dogs discovered in the bushes?

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

by **PeterMac** 17.10.11 8:23

jd wrote:KMs Book FRIDAY 4 MAY
Friday 4 May. Our first day without Madeleine. As soon as it was light Gerry and I resumed our search. We went up and down
roads we’d never seen before, having barely left the Ocean Club complex all week. We jumped over walls and raked through
undergrowth. We looked in ditches and holes."
She forgot she had already admitted on camera she NEVER searched for Madeleine.

And don't forget that Gerry ALREADY KNEW that JT had seen Madeleine being carted off by bundleman. He took his wife out jumping over walls and scrabbling about in the muck without telling her. She only found out later.
p. 83 "That morning I learned of the man Jane had seen in the street. Although Gerry and our friends had been trying to protect me from further distress by not telling me about this sooner, when they did I was strangely relieved. Madeleine hadn’t just disappeared off the face of the earth. There was
something to work on."
Is this credible ?
Would any husband do this ? Would anyone pretend to search without letting on that he knew it was a stupid, hopeless, and time wasting activity ?
Would any father pretend to search in this way, or would he follow the alleged route taken by the alleged abductor looking for any sign.

Can any McCann-believer actually believe this ?
And if so, could they rationalise it for the rest of us mere mortals, so that we can understand too.

by Guest 17.10.11 8:32

PeterMac wrote:
jd wrote:KMs Book FRIDAY 4 MAY
Friday 4 May. Our first day without Madeleine. As soon as it was light Gerry and I resumed our search. We went up and down
roads we’d never seen before, having barely left the Ocean Club complex all week. We jumped over walls and raked through
undergrowth. We looked in ditches and holes."
She forgot she had already admitted on camera she NEVER searched for Madeleine.
And don't forget that Gerry ALREADY KNEW that JT had seen Madeleine being carted off by bundleman. He took his wife out jumping over walls and scrabbling about in the muck without telling her. She only found out later.
p. 83 "That morning I learned of the man Jane had seen in the street. Although Gerry and our friends had been trying to protect me from further distress by not telling me about this sooner, when they did I was strangely relieved. Madeleine hadn’t just disappeared off the face of the earth. There was
something to work on."
Is this credible ?
Would any husband do this ? Would anyone pretend to search without letting on that he knew it was a stupid, hopeless, and time wasting activity ?
Would any father pretend to search in this way, or would he follow the alleged route taken by the alleged abductor looking for any sign.

Can any McCann-believer actually believe this ?
And if so, could they rationalise it for the rest of us mere mortals, so that we can understand too.

I don't think its credible. If that information was true, from Jane, it would have comed forward the first 10 minutes upon discovering Madeleine was missing.
If I was Jane I would run my feets of to get the information to the parents and the police. And if the sighting was true she would have connected her seeing to Madeleines disapperance right away.

If I was the father and got this information I would not held it back for my wife. I would have told her straight away, and there is no excuse trying to protect her from further distress? Thats a lame excuse for not telling her about it.

And no sane persons would go out searching in the neighbourhood if you had gotten information that someone had walked away with her. And you would defently not drag your wife out to look without letting her know that someone saw a man carrying away their daughter.

And when she later on says she never physicly looked for her, well wich story should we believe then Kate? And why where you not looking? And why do you complain on others not looking when you, the mother, didnt even bothered to look for her ?

by dentdelion 17.10.11 9:49

And what of the twins ? who was minding them while the parents where scrambling about in the dawn light?

The pink blanket and discrepancies about cuddle cat's position immediately after disappearance would be another suggestion.

by russiandoll 17.10.11 11:42

No Peter Mac, it just would not have happened, would it? Just as another thing would not have happened after the vanishing of little Maddie. Rather than be convinced without any evidence that your precious toddler had been taken by a paedophile, you would in my opinion in the immediate aftermath of such an event, be trying to convince yourself, even if there was evidence to suggest such a scenario, that it had not happened that way, that there was a more benign reason behind the disappearance, a psychological act of denial for self-preservation if not the desire in the face of evidence to the contrary to believe that something so horrendous had happened to a much loved child. No wonder the alarm bells started ringing with the police immediately.

by steevo1962 17.10.11 11:53

I'd be knocking down every door in the direction of where Tanner allegedly saw the abductor going. I'd be like a hunting dog tracking unendlessly in the search of my daughter along with as many folk I could manage to assemble!

I certainly wouldn't be wasting my time phoning media and family and friends as every second is another second allowing the apparent abductor to get further and further away.

It so doesn't make sense to anyone with the most basic level of common sense!!!!!!

by Smokeandmirrors 17.10.11 19:43

"STRANGELY RELIEVED"???????? Is she having a laugh? That would infer by odds of probability that she would be sexually harmed and killed, as in cases such as Sarah Payne, Jamie Bulger or Millie Dowler, or any number of poor children over the years. Being told someone had seen a man carrying off with what looked like Madeleine would be the worst possible scenario. At that early stage surely the hope would be that she had wandered off and would soon be found. Someone seeing a potential abductor carting her away, a long time before the witness had the good sense to act on the so-called sighting, would virtually ring the death knell of hope.

by **PeterMac** 17.10.11 23:05

Smokeandmirrors wrote:"STRANGELY RELIEVED"???????? Is she having a laugh? That would infer by odds of probability that she would be sexually harmed and killed, as in cases such as Sarah Payne, Jamie Bulger or Millie Dowler, or any number of poor children over the years. Being told someone had seen a man carrying off with what looked like Madeleine would be the worst possible scenario. At that early stage surely the hope would be that she had wandered off and would soon be found. Someone seeing a potential abductor carting her away, a long time before the witness had the good sense to act on the so-called sighting, would virtually ring the death knell of hope.

Quite so. It was only 8 hours since the "disappearance".
I lost a small dog 4 years ago, and spent a great deal more time looking for it, knocking on neighbour's doors, sticking posters on telegraph poles, and generally getting the message out, than the McCanns spent looking for their daughter.
But there again you have to remember -
- My dog was lost and capable of being found - (he was !)

by **tigger** 18.10.11 10:13

Brilliant idea, these snapshots of lies and evidence to the contrary.
Because Gerry would be rather miffed to see that his carefully constructed confusion is being dismantled in easy small bites.

I would suggest the shutters, on the truth and lies topic is a video by Portugese TV, where the Ms are sitting by the beach, 2010 I think, doing the shutter up! arms up!
The shutters were also up in the book (or could be opened from outside) in the book. In the Australian interview, I believe, they were up again.

But I think it is Diane Webster, whose statement said that they tried to lift the shutters (with Gerry) and it just got them stuck 1 inch above the sill. This can be seen in GNR photographs from inside.

The shutters were up, curtains flying (which means she must have tidied them behind the bed before running out with the news).

As you know the PJ, the lichen which wasn't disturbed, the argument that the front door would make too much noise and wake the children, so the far noisier shutters wouldn't have done that?

by russiandoll 18.10.11 11:14

When was this filmed, please? I am not a psychologist and do not use myself as a yardstick by which to judge others, however I am struck by how calm and controlled Gerry is here. He is in the very place that he alleges a dreadful thing happened to his flesh and blood. I am very surprised that even with the mightiest of effort for the camera and microphone to pick up clearly what he is trying to get across, he is managing to do this without the slightest tremor in his voice. There might have been a pause in filming of course but it looks seamless. He is discussing past events which I would expect to arouse enormous emotion in him, in the flattest monotone.
Maybe he has enormous powers of self control, but like with the early interviews where the couple claim they were advised not to show emotion.......being willing to try and do so is one thing, being able to actually do it is quite another.
His delivery is what I would expect to hear had he been describing his movements coming home to find his home burgled.
Is this a coping mechanism or is it truly a demonstration of a lack of genuine distress?

by steevo1962 18.10.11 12:20

I think Gerry and co are so relaxed because this is their way of controlling their version of events. Volunteering a re-inactment without the suspicions of the PJ they can appear to be co-operative and genuine in thier accounts leaving visions of innocent victims in the eyes of the public in order to attain more sympathy and support either emotionally or financially.

If this was a PJ re-inactment there would be a substantial amount of pressure on them as they would be aware of the suspicions of the PJ and they would not be able to control it in the same way that they wanted the world to see as the PJ would have done it more forensically, which would highlight the flaws in their timeline and versions of events?

The confusion over where Gerry and his friend were standing is a great example as to why it was critical to do this by themselves as the PJ would have jumped on this discrepancy straight away causing the whole re-inactment to fall apart.

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

by Cristobell 18.10.11 18:10

Interesting video Hideho, as regards suggestions....... I was intrigued by the link on the 'How to Spot a Lie' video and rewatching several of the (rare, lol)mccann interviews, I was amazed at how many times Gerry smirks, sometimes almost fleetingly, even when asked the most traumatic questions.

by russiandoll 18.10.11 18:52

C bell there is a wonderful smirk when he is interviewed by Paxman, posted here somewhere, he squirms in his seat and is profoundly uncomfortable. sadly paxo lets it go, does not push him.

steevo....I take your point about the McCann orchestration and their confidence. However, he was still in the place associated with something dreadful happening to his daughter and I cant understand the calm demeanour throughout.
Until I saw the video and transcript of the dogs I thought Maddie had been taken by arrangement by persons known and trusted as part of a money making scam , thats how I rationalised their composure.

by russiandoll 18.10.11 18:59

re the post about Kates book and " WE RESUMED OUR SEARCH" there is a great interview with Jane Hill I think from BBC asking how they felt about the local people taking time off work to search and Kate's wonderful response first a sigh " we were busy " with the regular umming and erring.....then " we were non functioning" [in her book they wee busy at meetings !] In fact I like it so much I will try and post it here

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

by whitenight 27.10.11 16:52

Never seen this asked before and this, my very first post, may well get slated, but I saw the above video and it reminded me of something I had thought to myself some time ago.

I’m sure I remember reading how part of the reason they left the rear sliding patio door open was because they wouldn’t disturb the children during their checks, which is just what GM alludes to in the video.

You will probably agree that if you were going to leave your children alone to go for drinks and dinner,(that’s a monumental “if” by the way), then when you checked on them, the last thing you would want to do is risk wakening any of them! (a real evening wrecker that!) You just wouldn’t want to make any noise at all – would you?

So you creep in the sliding patio door, have a quick look round your own bedroom (quietly), then look in on the children (trying not to make a sound).

Then you go to the toilet??

Look at the layout of 5a – the only toilet is in the bathroom and on the other side of the bathroom wall is Madeleine’s bed. You are quite literally flushing the loo (and having the tank re-fill), only a few feet from your daughters head and only a couple of feet further from the twins!! The noise would have been considerable to say the least! (tiled floors and by all accounts not the best soundproofed of buildings). A darn site louder than a lock in a door – no?

So why risk wakening one, or more, of the children? The toilet at the Tapas bar was less than a minutes walk away (30 seconds if you were in a real hurry!)

So my question is this : Why did GM “claim” to have gone to the loo during that 9.05 check?

by jd 27.10.11 16:58

And why did he walk the long way round to the apartment? and not the 49.2 metres route from the Tapas bar

by happychick 27.10.11 17:01

whitenight wrote:Never seen this asked before and this, my very first post, may well get slated

Aw, please don't think like that friends

by Guest 27.10.11 17:09

happychick wrote:
whitenight wrote:Never seen this asked before and this, my very first post, may well get slated

Aw, please don't think like that

It's a good point whitenight, and welcome to the forum welcome

As you say, why not use the toilet nearby. Must say though, I am one of those sad old people that have to get up in the night to go to the loo, sometimes more than once, and because my hubby has to get up very early for work, I don't flush the loo in the middle of the night, purely not to wake him blushing1

by **PeterMac** 27.10.11 18:35

jd wrote:And why did he walk the long way round to the apartment? and not the 49.2 metres route from the Tapas bar

Because to do so he would have had to walk across the pool, and then levitate over the wall and the lane and the wall into the garden, and up onto the patio..
And only one person in recorded history has been able to do that.

by Smokeandmirrors 27.10.11 19:37

PeterMac wrote:
jd wrote:And why did he walk the long way round to the apartment? and not the 49.2 metres route from the Tapas bar
Because to do so he would have had to walk across the pool, and then levitate over the wall and the lane and the wall into the garden, and up onto the patio..
And only one person in recorded history has been able to do that.

Yes Peter, but Gerry and the good man to whom you refer are both on chatting terms with his royal Popiness now aren't they? I bet Gezza has a flying carpet stashed in that invisible tennis bag of his, and skimming a pool and flying over a hedge or two is childs play for a man like him. Why, he's so smooth he could slide up a hill

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

by pauline 27.10.11 20:27

whitenight wrote:Never seen this asked before and this, my very first post, may well get slated, but I saw the above video and it reminded me of something I had thought to myself some time ago.

I’m sure I remember reading how part of the reason they left the rear sliding patio door open was because they wouldn’t disturb the children during their checks, which is just what GM alludes to in the video.

You will probably agree that if you were going to leave your children alone to go for drinks and dinner,(that’s a monumental “if” by the way), then when you checked on them, the last thing you would want to do is risk wakening any of them! (a real evening wrecker that!) You just wouldn’t want to make any noise at all – would you?

So you creep in the sliding patio door, have a quick look round your own bedroom (quietly), then look in on the children (trying not to make a sound).

Then you go to the toilet??

Look at the layout of 5a – the only toilet is in the bathroom and on the other side of the bathroom wall is Madeleine’s bed. You are quite literally flushing the loo (and having the tank re-fill), only a few feet from your daughters head and only a couple of feet further from the twins!! The noise would have been considerable to say the least! (tiled floors and by all accounts not the best soundproofed of buildings). A darn site louder than a lock in a door – no?

So why risk wakening one, or more, of the children? The toilet at the Tapas bar was less than a minutes walk away (30 seconds if you were in a real hurry!)

So my question is this : Why did GM “claim” to have gone to the loo during that 9.05 check?

Congratulations on your first point whitenight.

You raise a very interesting point. about the use of the toilet when there was a nearer one in the tapas bar.

the only explanation I can come up with is that Gerry was caught short and had to go to the nearest one, in this instance in the apartment. he may not have flushed the loo to avoid the noise. I think in a statement he mentions the toilet visit taking a couple of minutes at least (i could be wrong about this). You flush the toilet automatically, well most people do. I, like others on this site, think the children were not left alone but were minded in one place by the tapasnik who was officially sick that evening. if this is the case there is no reason why Gerry could not linger in the loo and flush it!

by Guest 27.10.11 20:31

Afraid to wake the children?
Most children don't wake up that easily at the first hours of the night sleep. Atleast in my place, and all my friends that have kids, can just live as normal after the kids go to bed. I mean you go to the toilet, you vacumclean, I can even go in to the kids rooms when they sleep, and place cleaned clothes in their kabins without them waking up. And I think this is normal for most children.
When K+G where home, I guess they didn't put a mouthbag on them self and hid in a corner after the children went to bed..

So why would they even be afraid of them waking up when cheking on them ?
Obviously due to what happened 3 May they didn't wake up that easily. Even if they where drugged by the "eggman", he had to enter first and no one woke up.

by Guest 28.10.11 8:18

The excuse about not wanting to wake the children is utter tosh and not very well thought out. If you read Kate's statement, she claims to have put all the children to bed (asleep), then taken a shower and dried her hair and let's not forget, followed by getting herself dressed.

List of noises after children went to sleep;

Shower with running water, turned on
Shampoo bottle and conditioner
Shower turned off
Hairdryer on for 10-15 minutes
Wardrobes opened
Clothes hangers being slid along
Wardrobes closed
Chest of drawers opened
Chest of drawers closed

This is for both of them, so all of the above times two, after the children went to sleep and they would have us believe that turning a key in a lock was noisy, yer right. sarcastic

by Anon 28.10.11 8:29

Stella wrote:The excuse about not wanting to wake the children is utter tosh and not very well thought out. If you read Kate's statement, she claims to have put all the children to bed (asleep), then taken a shower and dried her hair and let's not forget, followed by getting herself dressed.

List of noises after children went to sleep;

Shower with running water, turned on
Shampoo bottle and conditioner
Shower turned off
Hairdryer on for 10-15 minutes
Wardrobes opened
Clothes hangers being slid along
Wardrobes closed
Chest of drawers opened
Chest of drawers closed

This is for both of them, so all of the above times two, after the children went to sleep and they would have us believe that turning a key in a lock was noisy, yer right.

Shampoo bottle and conditioner? big grin

Since when have they been noisy enough to wake anyone?

by Guest 28.10.11 8:39

With water in your eyes and an unfamiliar place to put them down, which is usually on the side of the bath and bang !!!!, not just once, but twice . big grin

Or should I say 4 times, if Gerry uses conditioner on his heavenly locks. :bad:

by Guest 28.10.11 10:50

Stella wrote:The excuse about not wanting to wake the children is utter tosh and not very well thought out. If you read Kate's statement, she claims to have put all the children to bed (asleep), then taken a shower and dried her hair and let's not forget, followed by getting herself dressed.

List of noises after children went to sleep;

Shower with running water, turned on
Shampoo bottle and conditioner
Shower turned off
Hairdryer on for 10-15 minutes
Wardrobes opened
Clothes hangers being slid along
Wardrobes closed
Chest of drawers opened
Chest of drawers closed

This is for both of them, so all of the above times two, after the children went to sleep and they would have us believe that turning a key in a lock was noisy, yer right.

And don't forget sitting down talking, opening a bottle of wine , getting wine glasses, drinking, and so on...And I so agree that this fright of waking up the children is just nonsens.!!

by Guest 28.10.11 11:05

Exactly Moa, the whole apartment was like an echo chamber. All noises would be heightened, in a small confined place. What type of shoes was Kate wearing?, noisy flippy flops like Jane or high heels?

Using the patio door was never a quieter option, just a lame excuse.

Didn't Gerry in his first statement claim to have used the locked front door, then changed this?