Re: A theory, was Madeleine their natural child

by Guest 24.03.14 16:14

I don't think that Hollie Greig has been mentioned on this topic, magrat70.

Here's a link to a recent topic on this forum.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t7563-hollie-greig-the-devastating-fantasies-of-mother-mrs-anne-greig-and-the-lies-of-robert-green-and-belinda-mckenzie?highlight=hollie

by **tigger** 24.03.14 16:36

In answer to the title of this topic: YES, that was the ~~trouble~~ problem. imo.

by magrat70 24.03.14 16:48

It was mentioned by the person who gave all the dunblane stuff as a cover up and then said just look at Holly Greig like it is a proven fact. As a proud Aberdonian and knowing the owners of the Ferryhill too many people believe a lot of stuff that wasn't true, anyway don't want to drift this off subject

by Newintown 24.03.14 16:53

tigger wrote:In answer to the title of this topic: YES, that was the ~~trouble~~ problem. imo.

Yes, and why one of the 48 questions KM refused to answer was "were you thinking about giving Madeleine away to a family member to bring up", or words to that effect, I can't remember the actual words but they're near enough.

To bring up a question that is so filled with speculation points to the fact that someone had told the PJ that the McCanns couldn't cope/or didn't want to cope with Madeleine.

by Guest 24.03.14 16:59

For information, here are the questions again - still not whooshed from the BBC website!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7542939.stm

by Newintown 24.03.14 17:33

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:For information, here are the questions again - still not whooshed from the BBC website!

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

And to add to your post the fact that KM refused to answer the questions, except for one, saying that she knew by not answering the questions she was hampering the search for Madeleine.

Duuuhhhhh, so by her definition GA was hampering the search for Madeleine by saying that Madeleine was dead; but KM was not hampering the search by saying she knew she was hampering the search by not answering the 48 questions put to her by the PJ ???

roll

Have I got that right? smilie

by Hicks 24.03.14 18:14

I can't find any photo's showing Kate actually pregnant with Madeleine. No photo's of any pregnancies in fact.

Madeleine definitely has the facial characteristics of both parents and is a McCann no doubt. I do wonder if a surrogate mother was used. The embryo, a product of both parents, implanted into a third party.

The only photo I can find is Madeleine new born. Does it seem as though Kate has just given birth? umm...don't know.
Is the background a hospital bed or was it taken at home?

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/O/KGOprah.jpg.

by Guest 24.03.14 18:31

Hicks wrote:I can't find any photo's showing Kate actually pregnant with Madeleine. No photo's of any pregnancies in fact.

Madeleine definitely has the facial characteristics of both parents and is a McCann no doubt. I do wonder if a surrogate mother was used. The embryo, a product of both parents, implanted into a third party.

The only photo I can find is Madeleine new born. Does it seem as though Kate has just given birth? umm...don't know.
Is the background a hospital bed or was it taken at home?

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/O/KGOprah.jpg.

Doesn't look like KM being in hospital to me with her make up (lipstick) and earrings on......

I personally thought a surrogate mother was used. One of the reasons for the importance of medical records not being released. Amongst other reasons. Again IMO.

by **tigger** 24.03.14 19:03

Andrew77R wrote:
Hicks wrote:I can't find any photo's showing Kate actually pregnant with Madeleine. No photo's of any pregnancies in fact.

Madeleine definitely has the facial characteristics of both parents and is a McCann no doubt. I do wonder if a surrogate mother was used. The embryo, a product of both parents, implanted into a third party.

The only photo I can find is Madeleine new born. Does it seem as though Kate has just given birth? umm...don't know.
Is the background a hospital bed or was it taken at home?

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/O/KGOprah.jpg.
Doesn't look like KM being in hospital to me with her make up (lipstick) and earrings on......

I personally thought a surrogate mother was used. One of the reasons for the importance of medical records not being released. Amongst other reasons. Again IMO.

Looks like a hospital bed next to Gerry on his right. Kate certainly not just given birth.
Both looking rather young.
A) could be the surrogate mother in the bed
B) could be a photograph of the pair visiting a family member soon after a birth.

by Guest 24.03.14 19:13

tigger wrote:
Andrew77R wrote:
Hicks wrote:I can't find any photo's showing Kate actually pregnant with Madeleine. No photo's of any pregnancies in fact.

Madeleine definitely has the facial characteristics of both parents and is a McCann no doubt. I do wonder if a surrogate mother was used. The embryo, a product of both parents, implanted into a third party.

The only photo I can find is Madeleine new born. Does it seem as though Kate has just given birth? umm...don't know.
Is the background a hospital bed or was it taken at home?

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/O/KGOprah.jpg.
Doesn't look like KM being in hospital to me with her make up (lipstick) and earrings on......

I personally thought a surrogate mother was used. One of the reasons for the importance of medical records not being released. Amongst other reasons. Again IMO.

Looks like a hospital bed next to Gerry on his right. Kate certainly not just given birth.
Both looking rather young.
A) could be the surrogate mother in the bed
B) could be a photograph of the pair visiting a family member soon after a birth.

Well to me (could be wrong) but the baby looks hours old and KM certainly doesn't look like she just gave birth within a few hours.

So points A and B look certainly more valid.

Point A for me.

by ultimaThule 24.03.14 19:15

tigger wrote:
Andrew77R wrote:
Hicks wrote:I can't find any photo's showing Kate actually pregnant with Madeleine. No photo's of any pregnancies in fact.

Madeleine definitely has the facial characteristics of both parents and is a McCann no doubt. I do wonder if a surrogate mother was used. The embryo, a product of both parents, implanted into a third party.

The only photo I can find is Madeleine new born. Does it seem as though Kate has just given birth? umm...don't know.
Is the background a hospital bed or was it taken at home?

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/O/KGOprah.jpg.
Doesn't look like KM being in hospital to me with her make up (lipstick) and earrings on......

I personally thought a surrogate mother was used. One of the reasons for the importance of medical records not being released. Amongst other reasons. Again IMO.

Looks like a hospital bed next to Gerry on his right. Kate certainly not just given birth.
Both looking rather young.
A) could be the surrogate mother in the bed
B) could be a photograph of the pair visiting a family member soon after a birth.

Could it be that the wee one's nephew is the relatively newborn baby in the photo?

by Guest 24.03.14 19:21

tigger wrote:
Andrew77R wrote:
Hicks wrote:I can't find any photo's showing Kate actually pregnant with Madeleine. No photo's of any pregnancies in fact.

Madeleine definitely has the facial characteristics of both parents and is a McCann no doubt. I do wonder if a surrogate mother was used. The embryo, a product of both parents, implanted into a third party.

The only photo I can find is Madeleine new born. Does it seem as though Kate has just given birth? umm...don't know.
Is the background a hospital bed or was it taken at home?

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/O/KGOprah.jpg.
Doesn't look like KM being in hospital to me with her make up (lipstick) and earrings on......

I personally thought a surrogate mother was used. One of the reasons for the importance of medical records not being released. Amongst other reasons. Again IMO.

Looks like a hospital bed next to Gerry on his right. Kate certainly not just given birth.
Both looking rather young.
A) could be the surrogate mother in the bed
B) could be a photograph of the pair visiting a family member soon after a birth.

Why is that photo black and white? Black and white photograph plus that logo stuck right by the baby, makes it very difficult to see baby's colouring or clothing fully. Certainly looks like a new born baby; parents are incredibly relaxed! Wonder how long afterwards it was taken?

by Guest 24.03.14 19:28

How old is GM's nephew....

Judging by the pics in KM's crock of a book then she looks exactly the same in the pic that Hicks posted as she does with a pic of her holding a very young MBM who i would say looks a couple of months old.

Also the she looks extremely underweight in that pic. (the pic wear she is toasting a glass a champagne in one hand and 2 month old MBM in the other). No child bearing hips or puppy fat normally associated with post birth.

by Guest 24.03.14 19:37

Andrew77R wrote:How old is GM's nephew....

Judging by the pics in KM's crock of a book then she looks exactly the same in the pic that Hicks posted as she does with a pic of her holding a very young MBM who i would say looks a couple of months old.

Also the she looks extremely underweight in that pic. (the pic wear she is toasting a glass a champagne in one hand and 2 month old MBM in the other). No child bearing hips or puppy fat normally associated with post birth.

Certainly I couldn't get my wedding ring on in the labour ward or for a good few days after due to fingers swelling. And bags under eyes?

by Monty Heck 24.03.14 19:59

MILLIE wrote:
Andrew77R wrote:How old is GM's nephew....

Judging by the pics in KM's crock of a book then she looks exactly the same in the pic that Hicks posted as she does with a pic of her holding a very young MBM who i would say looks a couple of months old.

Also the she looks extremely underweight in that pic. (the pic wear she is toasting a glass a champagne in one hand and 2 month old MBM in the other). No child bearing hips or puppy fat normally associated with post birth.
Certainly I couldn't get my wedding ring on in the labour ward or for a good few days after due to fingers swelling. And bags under eyes?

Even the slender Kate Middleton was carrying a little weight on her face (and figure), and there were shadows under her eyes immediately post birth. In the black and white pic in question KMcC is way too fresh and made up to have just delivered a baby and this is almost certainly one taken of the McC's with someone else's child. Someone pointed out the earrings also - agree that doesn't fit either with a mum with a newborn. Who has time to worry about such things when a newborn is brought home? Then again, who worries about or wastes time on matching sets of fine silver chains and equally fiddly earrings, when their child has just gone missing, presumed abducted?

by ultimaThule 24.03.14 20:14

Let alone putting ribbons in their hair, Monty Heck :frown:

by Hicks 24.03.14 20:22

If the McCann's had used a surrogate mother it would go some way to explain the emotional distance Kate shows when discussing Madeleine.

I have always been curious as to why Gerry McCann frequently makes the point, in many interviews that, 'Madeleine is a mixture of both Kate and I'. Almost like he is trying to reinforce the point but why?

Most mothers ( I know I was) are puffy post birth. Kate in the early pictures does not look like someone who has given birth.

by Dr What 24.03.14 20:32

I suspect that the PJ were told a lot of information about Ms Healy's health, both physical and mental, and that was the reason for the type of questions that they decided to ask her during her interview.This information has not yet been made public, hence giving rise to the UK publics' reaction that some of the questions appeared odd and irrelevant.
The PJ were questioning the level of bonding that had taken place between 'mother' and child, and the reasons behind any possible dysfunction.

by MissesWillYa 24.03.14 22:05

That photo is bizarre. Why isn't it Kate sitting up in the bed holding her brand-new baby? Why does it seem like she's dropped into the frame like she's just hanging out in the room? The baby could be anyone, since it's impossible to see its face. Kate does look weirdly made up and chipper for having just given birth. I think this could be as someone else mentioned, a niece or nephew, probably a child of John. I've long suspected that the photo which supposedly depicts Kate lying back on a couch with the infant Madeleine on her chest actually depicts Kate holding cousin Fiona. Kate looks far too young in that photo for it to be of her and Madeleine. Kate was 35 when M was born and that child is at least a year old. It's just my opinion, but I don't think Kate looks 36+ in that photo.

by Harriet94 24.03.14 23:01

It probably isn't any relevance at all to this discussion, but on the 1st October 2009, according to the HFEA website, new laws in the UK gave donor conceived people new legal rights to find out the identity of their donors.

by ultimaThule 24.03.14 23:13

Harriet94 wrote:It probably isn't any relevance at all to this discussion, but on the 1st October 2009, according to the HFEA website, new laws in the UK gave donor conceived people new legal rights to find out the identity of their donors.

And about time too, Harriet. God knows what harm is in store for those who unwittingly couple with their half-siblings due to an absence of information about those who donated sperm, eggs, or both, to their lawful parents.

by Harriet94 24.03.14 23:21

I totally agree, Ultima Thule. Especially as it may be relatives and friends who may agree to become donors in the first place.

by Guest 25.03.14 7:29

ultimaThule wrote:
tigger wrote:
Andrew77R wrote:
Hicks wrote:I can't find any photo's showing Kate actually pregnant with Madeleine. No photo's of any pregnancies in fact.

Madeleine definitely has the facial characteristics of both parents and is a McCann no doubt. I do wonder if a surrogate mother was used. The embryo, a product of both parents, implanted into a third party.

The only photo I can find is Madeleine new born. Does it seem as though Kate has just given birth? umm...don't know.
Is the background a hospital bed or was it taken at home?

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/O/KGOprah.jpg.
Doesn't look like KM being in hospital to me with her make up (lipstick) and earrings on......

I personally thought a surrogate mother was used. One of the reasons for the importance of medical records not being released. Amongst other reasons. Again IMO.

Looks like a hospital bed next to Gerry on his right. Kate certainly not just given birth.
Both looking rather young.
A) could be the surrogate mother in the bed
B) could be a photograph of the pair visiting a family member soon after a birth.
Could it be that the wee one's nephew is the relatively newborn baby in the photo?

Can't see any cannula or cannula plaster marks on her hands either. In the NHS cannulas are applied to the expectant mother's hand during labour to deliver pain relief etc and left there after delivery in case the mother requires surgery after delivery. It saves staff time preparing the woman for surgery if it proves necessary. The back of the hand shows for this with bruising often aswell as the adhesive marks from the dressing which has to have held the cannula firmly in place. Of course K may have had it removed several days earlier by the time the pic taken but still no marks.

by Miraflores 25.03.14 7:48

In the NHS cannulas are applied to the expectant mother's hand during labour to deliver pain relief etc and left there after delivery in case the mother requires surgery after delivery.

Not always.
Nor are newly delivered women always puffy and swollen. I was very sick during my first pregnancy, so didn't have an ounce of spare flesh on my face.

I don't think we can go jumping to conclusions on the basis of one not very clear photo.

by Guest 25.03.14 11:18

I agree, Miraflores.

There is no reason why anyone should have to release photos in the public domain of themselves being visibly pregnant.

There are a few "look at me" actresses who think this is a good idea - particularly while unclothed - but I certainly don't!

The puzzle for me is not why Kate didn't release any such photos of herself but why she chose to inflict those ghastly inappropriate photos of Madeleine before the holiday on us, rather than any believable ones while she was there.

Log in for more topics