Re: There is a Little Girl Missing

by jmbd 13.02.10 15:03

Autumn wrote:Lynx, if the McCanns and their friends seriously believed Madeleine to be alive, they would have rushed back to PDL long ago to do a reconstruction. I hope that the pathetic excuses given by some of the Tapas 7 are included in the MF book - the public would be sickened by them.

If the "reconstruction" is televised (which was denied by the PJ when they requested it) then maybe they will all go back and do it.

by Cath 13.02.10 16:07

Aumnut the PJ should have done a reconstruction long time ago.
The PJ should have invited all witnesses of that night. They didn't.

by Autumn 13.02.10 16:21

But surely it would be helpful if it could be established once and for all, where the tapas 9 were at the time they state Madeleine was abducted?
In the Mockumentary, they couldn't even agree which side of the road Jane Tanner was supposed to on and, to make matters worse, Dave Edgar said it didn't matter. Of course it matters if any progress is to be made in this case. Am I correct in saying that Gerry was chatting to Jez Wilkins outside the apartment, facing towards the 'abductor' as he strode 'purposfully' away?
But I agree, the PJ should not have allowed any of them to leave PDL until they had taken part in a reconstruction - given the many inconsistencies in the T9 statements, they should have all been forced to take part in a reconstruction.

by marigold 13.02.10 16:26

Autumn wrote:But surely it would be helpful if it could be established once and for all, where the tapas 9 were at the time they state Madeleine was abducted?
In the Mockumentary, they couldn't even agree which side of the road Jane Tanner was supposed to on and, to make matters worse, Dave Edgar said it didn't matter. Of course it matters if any progress is to be made in this case. Am I correct in saying that Gerry was chatting to Jez Wilkins outside the apartment, facing towards the 'abductor' as he strode 'purposfully' away?
But I agree, the PJ should not have allowed any of them to leave PDL until they had taken part in a reconstruction - given the many inconsistencies in the T9 statements, they should have all been forced to take part in a reconstruction.

And not been allowed to scuttle home like frightened rabbits when made arguidos.

by jmbd 13.02.10 16:29

"And not been allowed to scuttle home like frightened rabbits when made arguidos."

who allowed them to?

by marigold 13.02.10 16:35

jmbd wrote:"And not been allowed to scuttle home like frightened rabbits when made arguidos."

who allowed them to?

Maybe not 'allowed them to' but forced to by government interference.

by jmbd 13.02.10 16:38

what do you mean by "maybe"?

Do you mean it is a guess - or do you have evidence?

by Cath 13.02.10 16:39

In the Mockumentary, they couldn't even agree which side of the road Jane Tanner was supposed to on and

They didn't agree about that in their statements either. Nothing has changed.

But I agree, the PJ should not have allowed any of them to leave PDL until they had taken part in a reconstruction - given the many inconsistencies in the T9 statements, they should have all been forced to take part in a reconstruction.

At the time (May - August) there was no need to 'force' anybody.

Why did the PJ allow other tourists to leave before they were interviewed?

by jmbd 13.02.10 16:46

have we ever seen a statement from all the diners in tapas that night?

by Cath 13.02.10 17:15

Nope. Missing in the files or not translated yet.

by jmbd 13.02.10 17:18

there was somebody at another table - we know that from the files.

by Cath 13.02.10 17:33

Irwins? Sperrey?

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/T/03_VOLUME_IIIa_Page_608.jpg

by jmbd 13.02.10 17:36

oh dear - did they scuttle home before PJ questioned them?

by jmbd 13.02.10 17:37

were they invited to the reconstruction?

by jmbd 13.02.10 17:38

were the workers around on the night invited to the reconstruction?

by jmbd 13.02.10 17:39

was the guy and girlfriend who was fixing a door on that night invite to the reconstruction?

by jmbd 13.02.10 17:40

were the people who had cars in the street invited for a reconstruction?

by jmbd 13.02.10 17:42

maybe autumn should tell us who the PJ should have invited to the reconstruction. You know - a full list.

by jmbd 13.02.10 17:50

I haven't seem anything translated from the files that asks anyone else back, who was there on the night, to take part in the reconstruction - how odd.

by jmbd 13.02.10 17:50

Odd - or telling?

by Cath 13.02.10 17:55

"It should be added that other key witnesses were not invited to attend. "

by jmbd 13.02.10 17:59

I wonder why?

by Cath 13.02.10 18:24

Why indeed?
Perhaps this is why :

We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified.

by marigold 13.02.10 23:08

Inyx wrote:Why indeed?
Perhaps this is why :

We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified.

'Their innocence towards the fateful event' thinking

:lol:

by arsenal666 15.02.10 14:28

jack wrote:How can the Portuguese police be any help at all when they are convinced that maddie is dead and the MCCanns have hidden her body?

There is no evidence to prove GM "Thesis".The police know she is dead and the that G+K are complicit in her demise.Thats what the report from the investigation says.And if i were a Portuguese police man i would not want to help these child killers!! Would you?
thumbsup

:

by vaguely1 15.02.10 14:35

arsenal666 wrote:
jack wrote:How can the Portuguese police be any help at all when they are convinced that maddie is dead and the MCCanns have hidden her body?

There is no evidence to prove GM "Thesis".The police know she is dead and the that G+K are complicit in her demise.Thats what the report from the investigation says.And if i were a Portuguese police man i would not want to help these child killers!! Would you?
:

Would you not want to help a child? Even if the child is dead?

by Cath 15.02.10 15:14

arsenal666 wrote:
jack wrote:How can the Portuguese police be any help at all when they are convinced that maddie is dead and the MCCanns have hidden her body?

There is no evidence to prove GM "Thesis".The police know she is dead and the that G+K are complicit in her demise.Thats what the report from the investigation says.And if i were a Portuguese police man i would not want to help these child killers!! Would you?
:

What report are you referring to? That's not in the final PJ report, nor the AG's statement, nor what mr Menesez said in Court a couple of weeks ago.

by arsenal666 15.02.10 15:22

Yes of coarse i would,but the MCCs only have to reopen the case and then they can get all the help the so badly seem NOT to want.the police have done a good job IMHO.Some 20-30000 pages in the files and statements,biggest ever missing child case in the world,untold hours of police time and resources used up.This does not take in to account,media support and lawyers and PR spokes people,etc etc.they have more help than you or would get,and they are lying all the time.They dont need help.....They need lynching.

Protect the child not the abusers!!!

by jack 15.02.10 15:29

arsenal666 wrote:
jack wrote:How can the Portuguese police be any help at all when they are convinced that maddie is dead and the MCCanns have hidden her body?

There is no evidence to prove GM "Thesis".The police know she is dead and the that G+K are complicit in her demise.Thats what the report from the investigation says.And if i were a Portuguese police man i would not want to help these child killers!! Would you?
:

This is why The McCanns have gone to court. you have listened Amaral and the PJ who do not understand the forensic evidence. On thursday the judge will rule that Amaral and his supporters are wro0ng to say that Maddie is dead. The best dogs in the world did not find one piece of forensic evidence to show that Maddie is dead.

by Cath 15.02.10 15:30

arsenal666 wrote:Yes of coarse i would,but the MCCs only have to reopen the case and then they can get all the help the so badly seem NOT to want.the police have done a good job IMHO.Some 20-30000 pages in the files and statements,biggest ever missing child case in the world,untold hours of police time and resources used up.This does not take in to account,media support and lawyers and PR spokes people,etc etc.they have more help than you or would get,and they are lying all the time.They dont need help.....They need lynching.

Protect the child not the abusers!!!

lynching.....

It's the Portuguese authorities who decide if and when they re-open the case.
Nobody else.

Latest topics