The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!

The 'Pros' want some Questions Answering!

View previous topic View next topic Go down

The 'Pros' want some Questions Answering!

Post by dragonfly on 12.09.11 23:10

I thought the latest blog from Writing of the wrongs 6/9/2011 deserved it's own thread as they want some question answering,
It would be good if we could get as many answers as possible, So they can understand why people question the official story,
Considering they seem to have a good relationship with the Mccann's maybe they could pass some of our queries over to their team, and If all the questions were answered this could all be cleared up and stop all the speculation and the Mccann's would not have to spend any more money on lawyers trying to sue people who's questions and opinions differ, and all the fund could be spent on the search for Madeleine rather than filling up the pockets of lawyers,

So you think YOU know better?
(WOTW title not mine)

To any anti-Madeleine who reads this:
I find that rather disturbing that the person writing this blog are calling people now 'anti Madeleine' I am anti no one, but just a person who questions the official story.
They even have a category called 'Pro Madeleine'

Why do you think YOU know better than the McCann supporters?
I do not think I know better, I do not support them nor do I have hatred towards them, So I do feel My views would be unbiased, I ask questions from both perspectives, I do not always agree with people in this forum and I do raise question with them For example I have giving my opinions which could lean to towards the Mccann's eg The upgrades of the bedrooms one poster on here even said to me that 'I could not bothered to read up' Just because I disagreed with the room upgrades as I did not feel that there was a sinister motive behind it, ( the reason I came to this conclusion which I did not explain to the poster as I feel they have their set opinions)It is because It something I have done Hundreds and hundreds of times through my working career I understand how the hotel trade works both In resort abroad and here in the UK, I also respect those opinions who have done a lot more research than me.
Because, and let’s face facts here,
But are you facing and reading facts though?

the death and cover up theory is so completely and utterly implausible it is beyond any form of logic. But an abduction theory is plausible ? In any investigation, ALL theories should be looked in to

Why cover up the death to begin with?
taking aside the Mccann case,As a whole When any crime happens most people do not want to get caught! want to be punished, go to prison, Have the shame, reputation destroyed ect ect (Im sure Peter Mac could would be good at answering that one or anyone who has worked within that field )

To conceal the fact that they all left their kids alone for a period of time?
Did they though ?

THEN they go and admit that they did just that anyway?
Well they could hardly deny it could they? if a child has vanished! What else could be said? she was snatched out of their arms?

When they discovered the body, why not just leave it there till the morning and claim she must have fallen out of bed or had an accident while everyone else was asleep?
Is this Person for real? Why leave it to the morning? Why claim someone fell out of bed if that is exactly what happened, Were they checking the children as often as they said they were? This leads to a more questions Again in general with any Investigation you have to look at Was there an accident? or Was a crime committed?

That would be far easier than concocting a fake abduction and no need to dispose of a body. Even so you are still implying on covering something up either way

Autopsies to determine time of death are not so precise as to be able to determine if she died just before or just after they returned to the apartment,
Autopsies reveal a lot, Why would someone not want an Autopsy? When a crime had taken place and I am talking in general with any crime a body would be disposed of as bodies can hold evidence
so she could have died any time after their return. So much easier. But why not just tell the doctor/hospital she died because of a tragic accident anyway?
This is a very important note if an accident is an accident that is what it is, so this can lead one to ask in any investigation was there not an accident and a crime taken place?
We know it wasn’t a Calpol overdose because Calpol is not a sedative. If she died as a result of an accident, then it was an accident, and again, the McCanns admitted leaving the kids alone anyway. There are conflicting stories on the calpol story within the Mccann family, So to see if Madeleine was on ANY medications one needs to look at medical records, Oh they were not handed over where they ? Why is this?

Who’s in on it?
The list would read like a telephone book. All the Tapas group for a start.
Yes it does , so the fact that the statements are full of contradictions, I accept that their could be some, but David Paynes 30 mins at the Mccanns apartment and Kates 30 seconds? are vastly different, so in order to clear this matter up , a reconstruction would be in order to move the investigation forward, Oh this was refused was it not?

Why would ALL of them agree to a cover up? One of them was the mother of one of the other friends, dont know who you mean so SHE would have nothing to fear about being charged with neglect would she? Don’t you think at least SHE would have acted as the voice of reason, and point out they would never get away with it, and should tell the truth? who?
Jez Wilkins, a man they only met while on holiday and who didn’t know them from Adam before that time, what would HE have to gain from participating in a cover up?
And the body? That small, innocent body. Where did they hide it?
Not in the apartment, because that was searched. The same apartment that a blood hound alerted at the same spot cadaver alerted at? Did the dogs have a prior arrangement to back on the same spot?

Given the small time frame, and given they were tourists and had no local knowledge, where the hell could they hide it? Another empty apartment? Did the McCanns have a key to any other apartment?
Are you asking if the Mccanns were given any keys during their time in PDL? I know that they had keys given to them for the church but unaware of any keys for any apartments.That would then involve a member of staff. “Excuse us, but our daughter just died and we need to hide her body, can you unlock that spare apartment please?” How likely is that? Yes I agree very Unlikely

Amaral says the body was stored in a freezer but the freezers in the apartment are way too small so it would need the help of a local in PdL. Again, “Excuse us, but can we store the body of our dead three year old in your freezer for a few days?” No way. I agree I do not believe the Mccann's would purchase ice creams and would ask say a kiosk worker that, Or having a bit of tapas and would ask a waiter this , or in fact a local shop worker ect for a request like that I can agree with that

And then moving the body in the hired car. In front of the whole world’s media circus, right outside their front door. And not ONE of them spotted a thing? Not ONE?
a bit like Not one Independent witness out of the Mccann circle spotted the abductor?, Oh I have missed out the Smiths, The same Smiths who then said they thought it could of been Gerry? We will leave that one then

Then the McCanns were made arguidos and were investigated. For investigated read “attempted to be framed”. Are you suggesting that the Cadaver alerts in the car were the framing? The ones that the Mccann's confirmed were there by explaining it as sea bass? dirty nappies? rotting steaks? The dogs were right there then? but not in the apartment?
However the final and therefore only valid conclusion was that of the Portuguese Attorney General, who said that none of the suspicions that came to pass had any validation and that there was no evidence whatsoever that the McCanns committed any crime
Was this said? Or what you choose to believe? Neglect is not a crime in your eyes either?

and that therefore their suspect status was lifted. What then of the guilty McCanns?

Did they breathe a sigh of relief and accept they had got away with it, No they Do feel they need to have a PR machine and defence lawyers though why? Did Sarah Payne's Family do this or set up a fund or any other family do this days within their child going missing?
and then SHUT THE HELL UP? NO. and the Mccann's promote your blog?

They then proceeded to beg, and plead, and cry for anyone with any information regarding the case to come forward. But their own investigators failed to follow up any leads on the phoneline of any one for that matter failed to follow up any leads Did they not think, even for a second, that someone could in fact come forward with the very thing that could prove their guilt? Is THAT really the actions of a guilty person? It is also not the actions to refuse 48 questions?
The whole party would need the acting skills of Oscar winners to pull it off, Well I feel that is why you have forums like this as people do not believe that they are acting like Oscar winners Ie Jane Tanner infamous you tube video 'I was holding the body like this' and continue to put on this act for as long as it takes, which the McCanns seem determined to prolong, despite being ‘Guilty.’

The whole death and cover up thesis is preposterous in the extreme, so far-fetched that if you wrote it into a film script, no studio or director would touch it. not when Carter and Ruck are about ! Why do you think the Portuguese AG summed the case up by declaring that there was no evidence that the McCanns committed any crime? Do you mean no evidence or not enough evidence to secure a conviction? Because there IS no evidence the McCanns committed any crime. Now, why do YOU think you know better than a man who knows more about the Portuguese legal system than any of us?




Posts : 318
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2011-03-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The 'Pros' want some Questions Answering!

Post by Gillyspot on 12.09.11 23:20

Just a few.

"When they discovered the body, why not just leave it there till the morning and claim she must have fallen out of bed or had an accident while everyone else was asleep? "

Because anyone would know that when a coroner arrived (and surely Kate & Gerry would know this) they would be able to ascertain the time of death and that time would not suit the McCanns story.

"so she could have died any time after their return. So much easier. But why not just tell the doctor/hospital she died because of a tragic accident anyway? " That has the same answer as the one above except that if Madeleine had been proved to die whilst the McCanns were out then they were in serious trouble. In fact in Portugal the sentence for this is up to 10 years in prison

Why would ALL of them agree to a cover up?
Because if the McCanns were found guilt of neglect so would all the rest of T9 (with exception of Diane Webster possibly) as all stated were leaving their children (toddlers & babies) unnatended.

Posts : 1470
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2011-06-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Simple reasons from a pro Madeleine

Post by tigger on 13.09.11 7:28

It's clear to the police and most other experts on this case that there was no neglect and therefore no abduction.

IMO: there was something wrong with Madeleine's health and mental development. This is not unusual with IVF births.
She was probably sedated on a regular basis. I think she was simply overdosed by accident on purpose, you might say. If her medical records ever become available to the police, it will be clearer. For me, the photographs where the heavy eye bags aren't shopped out, the slight droop of her right eye which is clear when she doesn't smile, point to some kind of illness.

IMO too: the abduction scenario was in place before they left for Portugal.
The publicity and the Fund were sketched out as well.
The T7 weren't necessarily in on it, but Maddie died early in the holiday and they agreed to help.
The unparalelled protection they got immediately, the publicity machine which was set in motion before they ever phoned the police all supports the above.

My main point is: if they had access to this sort of protection, they would not have needed to fake an abduction. All negative results from a PM, the manner of the child's death, could be manipulated by the same powers that have scandalously interfered with the normal course of justice.
If the child had died in the apartment and they were proven to be culpable, all this could be covered over within weeks by the same very influential people. The McCann's would have been pitied, but kept their jobs, their house etc. Some publicity, but not a lot.

But there would have been no 'fighting fund' , no money. Therefore the abduction story was necessary for all of the plan to work. Nobody is going to donate money to a pair of well paid doctors because their child has died on holiday.

The parents have made her the most beautiful, famous little girl in the world. The original plan was perhaps to change careers and become ambassadors for CEOP, start the fund to help other children all over the world. Redemption you might say.

The iconic photograph of Madeleine barely looks like her. Not only did they have this photograph ready and printed on quality A4 photo paper, the coloboma which they admitted in an interview with Piers Morgan, didn't exist, was in place. The photograph was taken around Christmas 2005, when she was two and a half.

If you want the maximum chance of finding your child, surely you choose a recent photograph? One where she actually looks the way she is now?
If you believe she has been abducted, do you plan within weeks for the 1st year anniversary of her disappearance? Shouldn't you be looking for her instead?

Very few of us post here not because we hate the McCanns, but because Maddie has rights.

Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 50
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The 'Pros' want some Questions Answering!

Post by Jill Havern on 13.09.11 7:33

@tigger wrote:It's clear to the police and most other experts on this case that there was no neglect and therefore no abduction.

Here's what just a few of the police and other experts have to say about the Maddie Case - surely they can't all be wrong and people like WOTW author (who, presumably, wasn't there) is right?

Inspector Ricardo Paiva: "It was Scotland Yard who first thought it could be a murder case."

Criminal profiler NPIA, Lee Rainbow: "Madeleine's father was the last one to see her alive. The family is a lead that should be followed. Contradictions in Gerald McCann's statements might lead us to suspect a homicide."

Manuel Catriano: "This story did not begin in the Ocean Club, but in London where the 'official truth' was conspired and established: an English girl was kidnapped in the Algarve."

Martin Brunt: "The crucial part of the evidence appears to be a complete match of Madeleine's DNA in the boot of the hire car"

Martin Grime: "My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. The dog's behaviour for these alerts led me to the following opinions. The first alert was given with the dog’s head in the air without a positive area being identified. This is the alert given by him when there is no tangible evidence to be located [i.e. a physical corpse], only the remaining scent."

Gonçalo Amaral: "If the body had been buried there would have been mummification. The fact that there were fluids points to refrigeration."

Jose Barra da Costa, PJ: "There are people who guarantee that this is a couple who practice 'swinging' - i.e. sexual relationships between couples and then changing partners, and that this practice would allow in this type of..."

PJ Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida: "From what has been established up to now, everything indicates that the McCann couple, in self-defence, doesn’t want to deliver the cadaver immediately and voluntarily, and there is a strong possibility that it was moved from the initial place of deposition."

Portuguese Attorney General Fernando Pinto Monteiro: "One way or another the McCanns were responsible for their child’s death"

Carlos Anjos: "....That situation, that day, advertising that photo, was simply the death sentence of that child."

Francisco Moita Flores: "I have no doubts that the child died. Who knows, one day a fishing net will pick up a bag with a child's bones in it."

Dr Paulo Sargento: "Let the twins do the mourning of their sister. You both know she will not appear."

Lawyer Joao Grade: "I read his book and I was convinced, as I had been before, anyway, that it was not an abduction. But the book does not defame the McCanns, Gonçalo Amaral does not express his opinion in it, but an investigation thesis”

Dr Christian Lüdke: "Yes, it is possible that they planned this a long time ago, they must at least have played it through in their minds many times and they must have spoken about it together. Otherwise they would now be contradicting each other."

PJ Case Files: "Between 15h00 on August 4th 2007 and 06h30 on August 5th 2007, the following samples were recovered in the living room of apartment 5A at the OCEAN CLUB where a murder probably took place."
Jill Havern

Posts : 12085
Reputation : 5668
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

View user profile

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