Why didn't you come last night...?

Merrymo wrote:

aiyoyo wrote:e:
aiyoyo wrote:
Merrymo wrote
An abduction from this particular apartment may have been planned for months. I don't think it is beyond the wit of seasoned criminals to get hold of an apartment key maybe even months beforehand in readiness. .. It's not like a private house key. There is probably more than one key, used by various people going in and out - cleaners, maintenance people etc. Apartment keys do get lost and mislaid - and could be stolen or 'borrowed' and copied. Unless it can be proved that it is impossible for an apartment key go missing at this complex then it has to remain a viable possibility IMO.

According to previous tenants, the cleaners had a key, which opened the door even when their own key was left in the locked door on the inside.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Bloody hell I've heard it all now.

So these seasonal criminals with wit and ingenuity to get hold of key got only key to 5A? And they laid waiting where ?
No one has reported suspicious loiterers. Dont tell me they were hiding in the bush in front 5A for months and no one noticed them (must be ghostly invisible) until some moroons bring children to holiday and leave them alone?
And dont tell me they were prepared to wait indefinitely until the right type of child is brought to 5A that they prepared the key in advance and laid waiting?

And you were saying? errr these are a bunch of seasonal criminals with wit who copied every key in the resort but laid in wait only for occupants of 5A. OH......hmmm.only key to 5A? Oh so the cleaners were only careless with 5A key? What is it ? Have you made up your mind merrymole?

And, err.......you want us to believe these criminals have WIT and they are SEASONAL! Bloody hell be faster to snatch one anyhow from a busy place even if you're a complete dipstick with brain size of an eyelash.

Come on then...any more bright idea how to abduct a child to order from your mud brain? Sorry no disrespect intended. Do us something clever. We all want to know how exactly she was abducted.

-------------------------------


Maybe you should look up the words SEASONED and WIT.

Seasoned - To render competent through trial and experience

Wit - practical intelligence


If you think that criminals cannot possibly have the above attributes - then please explain how the phrase 'Criminal Mastermind' came into being? ... I didn't mention the word SEASONAL at all - which any dipstick knows has a completely different meaning. Maybe you had an eyelash in your eye when you were misreading my post.

BTW 6 sightings of 'Suspicious loiterers' were reported by 4 independent witnesses who noticed them during the few days before the abduction - some appeared to be surveilling Apartment 5a.

Will get back to the rest of your post tomorrow if poss.

Night night.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh dear, there you go again. Proving my point that you have mud for brain.

I think you should give us the definition of WIT and SEASONED applying this to criminal mastermind as you know it.

Surely you don't want us to believe that your gang of seasoned criminal with practical intelligence can end up doing a job in such a brain dead manner. Not characteristics of criminal mastermind as far as others know it.

Surely we all know criminals can have wit and be seasoned. Just look the who the Police suspect were involved in Maddie's death. You cant say the mccanns dont have wit. As for seasoned, from all accounts it appears they might have been seasoned at neglecting her.

My point is : is that the best your gang of seasoned criminals with wit [/u] can do?

You misread my post. Full stop. ..A simply 'Oops sorry' for the comments made as a result of that error would have sufficed. ..We all make mistakes.

If Maddie was abducted by a gang then how can you describe them as braindead? 5 years on and she has never been found. You can't have it both ways.


Got hold of ONLY key of 5A and laid in wait for months on end for some moroons to bring the right child then they were going leave unattended. If they had the key why didn't they exit the same way? Out of view way as far as we know. Why open the window? Why when their partners in crime (gang remember) are keeping watch did one of them dipsticks dangle Maddie across his arm and stroll leisurely in uncovered area stepping out right at the moment Janey was there?

OH btw the mccanns were not the only ones leaving their children alone on the 3/5?
Oh are we supposed to believe your wit and seasoned criminals have so much wit and so seasoned that when there are so many apts they managed only to nick key to 5A knowing someone right is going to check into 5A that they laid in wait indefinitely until that happens. And here we're are talking seasoned and clever criminal mastermind? Come on! next you will have us believe your gang of seasoned and not seasonal (my mistake)criminals with wit were particularly waiting for the Madeleine, and only Madeleine will do, not any blond child of that age group will do? You will have us believe they were especially waiting for the mccanns at the rate you dish out mud from mud brain.

Come on.....think about it...if they have wit would they stupidly hang around to be spotted? If they are so seasoned they would have made sure they are not spotted if you think about it or they will never get the chance to become "seasoned" so to speak.
If they have practical intelligence why restrict themselves to stealing only 5A key? Why chose thursday, the worst day to do it? You are not going to tell us they have a suicidal wish are you - your gang of seasoned criminals?

If they are seasoned surely they know better ways and method, and know where to find blond little girls. Don't forget your seasoned criminal with wit had to hide from Gerry while he sing a song if you believe Gerry.
That still doesnt explain why they chose Thursday and why 5A?

I notice you tend to avoid all the questions you cannot answer. We are all waiting for you to tell us exactly how Maddie was abducted. Maybe you can tell us how your gang of clever seasoned criminals could have got from where they laid waiting to snatch her in the 2-3 minutes time span and how one ended up dangling her from his outstretched strolling up the path in full view of Janey?
While you are at it maybe you could tell us why didn't they exit with their key? Why did they open the window if they had the key? How did he use his key when he'd Maddie stretched across both arms? Did he have to place her down first?

Don't tell me your gang of seasoned criminals with wit want the police to come after him /them knowing very well if they'd been FOCUSED ON WATCHING 5A that literally within a few minutes another adult is going to come along for the check to discover the open window and child gone and this joker stroll leisurely on FOOT! carrying the child in a manner he cannot make a run for it! Why not also tell us how the gang know where Madeleine bed was just from laying in wait?

He wasn't using gloves so why wasn't any trace of evidence left behind ..doorknob fingerprints for example - remember he used the key?

Come on, we are waiting for your entertaining answers...maybe you get an adrenaline high from clowning.


p.s. even an idiot for criminal would know better way of snatching a child, and from a dark room in a locked holiday apt constantly checked is not an idiot-proof way.

----------------------------------

We could argue all day about these points. EG. We know the McCanns didn't have a car but we don't know whether the abductors did or what they did after they left 5A. All we know is where one of them was sighted at 10.00p.m. We have no way of knowing what happened in the meantime.

Unfortunately much as I would like to - I don't have time to spend hours posting on forums so to move things along - I'll put the following points to you.

-----------------------------------

I do not believe Maddie died between the hours of 5.30 and 8.30p.m on the 3rd May whilst she was with her parents at the apartment..

(1) If she had died during that time because of an accidental fall - then there is no reason in the world why her parents would not have simply dashed to Reception and asked for help - in exactly the same way anyone else would. What possible 'prosecution' could have resulted from their child tragically dying as a result of a fall - say - going up the steps, or on the patio, or a fall off the settee etc whilst they were with her. . Absolutely none. imo.

IN YOUR OPINION. Who says it was a fall, or even an accident??? Who is to say she had not been abused? oh you did - of course.

You state: 'What possible 'prosecution' could have resulted from their child tragically dying as a result of a fall - say - going up the steps, or on the patio, or a fall off a settee etc whilst they were with her. . Absolutely none. imo.

PROBLEM: According to their statements, THEY WERE NOT WITH HER, WERE THEY?

(2) If, on the other hand, she had died from a sedative overdose, either accidentally or given to her deliberately - then once again they simply had to call for help and say their daughter had collapsed and died - and claim at some stage that she must have found some of their pills and taken them .

Whether that was the truth or not - who was there to contradict them?

So once again why even consider a hugely complicated fake abduction plan involving disposing of a childs body, without the aid of a car, cleaning and scrubbing the place, washing curtains etc etc and implicating 7 other people when it was completely unnecessary?

All they had to say was ' We blame ourselves for not putting the pills out of her reach' - and though it would not be quite as straightforward as (1) above - it would not result in a prosecution IMO. ..We do hear of children - especially of Maddies age taking pills meant for others - which is why the warnings to keep medicine out the reach of childre are so prevalent.

I don't know what the time-lines are for a child to die due to an overdose of sedative. It may be possible that it would take hours on end. Does anyone know?

In both the above scenarios the babychecking arrangements are completely irrelevant - and no-one else would need to be asked to join in a cover-up.


A post-mortem would contradict them, Merrymo. If they gave her sedatives, it is unlikely they were pills - more likely IV injection - so how could they possibly say 'she found them laying around'? Unless prescribed for K or G by a doctor, they are illegal - another problem.

So, they would have to produce evidence of the 'pills' she accidentally got hold of. Packaging etc. They couldn't do this if they were using an iv sedative without giving themselves away.

A post-mortem would prove time of death, substance ingested, amount - so unless they could account for this, they would be in big trouble...
---------------------------

I believe she was alive on the 3rd May - simply because there are far too many independent witnesses who saw her- right up until she was having her tea to believe otherwise. Not just the witnesses who have given evidence but I'm sure there were many more amongst the other holidaymakers and their children who saw her that day - but who were allowed to go home without being interviewed. .. I've never heard any reports that Amaral or any other policeman believe she was not alive on the 3rd. If I'm wrong I'm sure you will correct me.

--------------------

So if I rule out the possibility of her death while she was with her parents in the apartment - then she could only have died after they left between 8.30 and 9.00ish p.m . .either from an accident or from an overdose of sedative. We know there was one check by GM - after which he was talking to JW at around 9.15 - he then returned to the restaurant and had his meal. So if anyone can tell me how he managed to fake the abduction in the time remaining before the alarm was raised at 10.00p.m when he was at the table - then I would be very interested to hear it. If you could also explain how he could be in two places at once(Smith sighting) that would be appreciated.

WHY would Gerry be in two places at once? According to you, the times in the statements were only approximate - it is YOU who is trying to have things both ways!!!

If you're just going to take the easy way out and dismiss any evidence by the Tapas 9 that doesn't suit - by saying they were lying - then don't bother unless you can prove they were lyilng. ... Anyone can build a case with those tactics. What, like you do you mean? ha, you ARE funny [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

candyfloss wrote:Whilst reading something, I came across this, ......

Interview with Mr Amaral

8/05/2011 02:00
Dave said... 9

Part 2 of 2. Goncalo Amaral Interview at the launch of his books dutch version
"A verdade da mentira"
05/05/09

Q: Is it true, as was reported in De Telegraaf, that an injection needle was found in the apartment?

A: No, that is not true. In fact we have found no medication at all. None at all. Except for ‘likdoornpleisters’ = litt.: corn plasters (for your feet – sorry can’t find a better translation).Q: Do you think the children were sedated?

A: There is no doubt.
(Here he told an anecdote: that Kate called a colleague of Gonçalo Amaral’s in the PJ, in August, to ask them to check the twins for traces of sedation. Apparently Kate was alone when she called, and a bit upset. That same afternoon, Gerry called and cancelled the request.)


And yet in her witness statement 6th September Kate says this:.................................

.When asked, she said that before they left she took some precautions, namely placed the medicine inside a bag with a clasp in her room inside the wardrobe or the dresser. These were Calpol (paracetamol) and Nurofen (ibuprofen), for fevers and pains, both for adults and children (packages in liquid for the children). In this bag there was also a small pair of scissors. In the kitchen were cutting items that were used to prepare the meals and which were not put out of sight. During their trips it was normal for them to take these medicines. During these holidays she never gave any medicine to her children, nor did Gerry. She now says that Gerry also took medicine for acidity called Losec (omeprozole) which they also possessed.


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



What happened to this bag then??

rainbow-fairy wrote:

tiny wrote:good post Me.I like to read these debates,but bloody hell Merrymo is making right prat of herself/himself.

Agreed tiny. And well said Me. But, like herpes, I fear Merrymo will return...
It was funny for a while but the joke is wearing thin now. Why has nobody pressed the button yet?
I am yearning for the day when we get a 'Pro' who actually says something NEW, something sensible!
I am sorry to say I think my yearning will be thwarted. What CAN they say? No evidence to back it up is the problem.

If you're just going to take the easy way out and dismiss any evidence by the Tapas 9 that doesn't suit - by saying they were lying - then don't bother unless you can prove they were lyilng. ... Anyone can build a case with those tactics.

Me wrote:

rainbow-fairy wrote:

tiny wrote:good post Me.I like to read these debates,but bloody hell Merrymo is making right prat of herself/himself.

Agreed tiny. And well said Me. But, like herpes, I fear Merrymo will return...
It was funny for a while but the joke is wearing thin now. Why has nobody pressed the button yet?
I am yearning for the day when we get a 'Pro' who actually says something NEW, something sensible!
I am sorry to say I think my yearning will be thwarted. What CAN they say? No evidence to back it up is the problem.

Well i don't mind Merrymo being here because the more we hear from her the more we can see the paucity of debate and absurdity of theory the Pro's have.

Let me tell you how Merrymo holds the opinions she has.

She, like many others, decided long ago that the Mccann's are good people. She has no direct knowledge of them but she (thinks she) knows in her heart of hearts that they could not have done the things they are accused of.

She has no evidence to back this up but it's how she feels about them.

Because Merrymo is convinced they can't have done it she needs to come up with these fantasy land explanations in an attempt to shoot down the theories eminating from the gathered evidence.

However Merrymo's attitude and pre conceived ideas about the parentss prevents her from looking at the evidence gathered objectively which is why, for example, the dogs are wrong and their results and methods disparaged but on the other hand, we are to believe that a gang with a key for 1 apartment waited months to find a family with a child just right for abduction, then somehow in no time got one or two people in and out again wihtout leaving a trace and no evidence behind.

So Merrymo is happy to dismiss out of hand the possibility that the evidence the dogs found (supported by forensic material) is bogus, wrong and impossible yet advocates gangs runnning around PDL with keys and associates.

It's sheer lunacy.

It doesn't matter how daft the theory or how little evidence there is Merrymo believes they are innocent no matter what and so has to concoct these outlandish theories in order to justify and re-affirm her belief in their innoncence.

I'm not even sure she'd believe they were guilty even if the team gave a confession live on TV.

rainbow-fairy wrote:

Me wrote:

rainbow-fairy wrote:

tiny wrote:good post Me.I like to read these debates,but bloody hell Merrymo is making right prat of herself/himself.

Agreed tiny. And well said Me. But, like herpes, I fear Merrymo will return...
It was funny for a while but the joke is wearing thin now. Why has nobody pressed the button yet?
I am yearning for the day when we get a 'Pro' who actually says something NEW, something sensible!
I am sorry to say I think my yearning will be thwarted. What CAN they say? No evidence to back it up is the problem.

Well i don't mind Merrymo being here because the more we hear from her the more we can see the paucity of debate and absurdity of theory the Pro's have.

Let me tell you how Merrymo holds the opinions she has.

She, like many others, decided long ago that the Mccann's are good people. She has no direct knowledge of them but she (thinks she) knows in her heart of hearts that they could not have done the things they are accused of.

She has no evidence to back this up but it's how she feels about them.

Because Merrymo is convinced they can't have done it she needs to come up with these fantasy land explanations in an attempt to shoot down the theories eminating from the gathered evidence.

However Merrymo's attitude and pre conceived ideas about the parentss prevents her from looking at the evidence gathered objectively which is why, for example, the dogs are wrong and their results and methods disparaged but on the other hand, we are to believe that a gang with a key for 1 apartment waited months to find a family with a child just right for abduction, then somehow in no time got one or two people in and out again wihtout leaving a trace and no evidence behind.

So Merrymo is happy to dismiss out of hand the possibility that the evidence the dogs found (supported by forensic material) is bogus, wrong and impossible yet advocates gangs runnning around PDL with keys and associates.

It's sheer lunacy.

It doesn't matter how daft the theory or how little evidence there is Merrymo believes they are innocent no matter what and so has to concoct these outlandish theories in order to justify and re-affirm her belief in their innoncence.

I'm not even sure she'd believe they were guilty even if the team gave a confession live on TV.

Me, you raise a very important point (one I've been thinking about more and more lately)

The rabid Pro-McCanns, how will they feel WHEN (I'm being positive) not IF it is proven they lied through their teeth? I have a suspicion that many of them WON'T believe it! That is how sucked in to the fantasy they are.

Its truly terrifying to think people can be so naive.



At least Merrymo being here shows up the true absurdity of the Pro's stance - it's just a case of I want to hear something different... just the same old s**t about clever, professional gangs targeting 5A (so clever they wait til the Thursday when the T9 allegedly stepped up patrol? P-lease...)

Its just tedious, and shows how far their desire for the T9 to be innocent totally lambasts their reasoning powers.

tiny wrote:I think it would be a good idea if merrymo read the files,she/he would save herself a lot of embarrassment,or perhaps she /he doesnt mind because she is not here for Madeleine and the truth.

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

In case we have forgotten, this is a reminder of their interview one year on where they talk about Madeleine's question 'Where were you last night...?'. It is fascinating because they were less comfortable with their lies in those days, less polished, and one gets more than a glimpse of their raw emotions (anguish, sadness, anger, fear, defiance...) on display. I'd love to hear Merrymo's interpretation of this [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]


Interesting analysis of the same video here
[url=http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/nvc-analysis-of-mccanns-in-one-year-on-doc-where-were-you-when-sean-and-i-cried/

Me wrote:

rainbow-fairy wrote:

tiny wrote:good post Me.I like to read these debates,but bloody hell Merrymo is making right prat of herself/himself.

Agreed tiny. And well said Me. But, like herpes, I fear Merrymo will return...
It was funny for a while but the joke is wearing thin now. Why has nobody pressed the button yet?
I am yearning for the day when we get a 'Pro' who actually says something NEW, something sensible!
I am sorry to say I think my yearning will be thwarted. What CAN they say? No evidence to back it up is the problem.

Well i don't mind Merrymo being here because the more we hear from her the more we can see the paucity of debate and absurdity of theory the Pro's have.

Let me tell you how Merrymo holds the opinions she has.

She, like many others, decided long ago that the Mccann's are good people. She has no direct knowledge of them but she (thinks she) knows in her heart of hearts that they could not have done the things they are accused of.

She has no evidence to back this up but it's how she feels about them.


Not true. I have no way of knowing what the McCanns are really like as I don't know them and have only ever seen them in unnatural circumstances - TV interviews etc. ..

The only way I can make any kind of assessment of them at all is by what people who DO know them have to say about them. This would be family, friends, work colleagues, neighbours, nursery staff, priest, etc. and all those people seem to agree that the McCanns were a normal ordinary family. ..Why would I believe people who have never met them over people who have?

ALso what hasn't been claimed about them is pertinent IMO

I have never read any 'kiss 'n tell stories about then - so no extra marital affairs, No-one to my knowledge has offered a story to the press about them to reveal how 'nasty' they really are - no reports of wild parties, falling out of nightclubs, kicking dogs or disturbing the neighbours - no allegations at all that they were bad parents. etc etc. .. And believe me the newspapers would have gone to a great deal of trouble to try to find something sensational about them. .. They obviously didn't so had to resort to lying about them in order to sell papers instead.

As there is no evidence at all that they are pyschopaths, party goers, alcoholics, hell raisers, drug addicts, or fornicators - and have no criminal records, then yes - I did come to the conclusion that they were probably a reasonably normal couple - except they were a couple who wanted children so badly that they turned to IVF - and having succeeded were living a pleasantly fulfilled life - with their children, and probably with no money troubles.

So tell me why I should not come to those conclusions?

If I was forced on pain of death to say what I personally thought about them on what I have seen of them on TV - then I don't think either of them are easy to warm to, and they are not the type of people that I could see myself being best buddies with.

Because Merrymo is convinced they can't have done it she needs to come up with these fantasy land explanations in an attempt to shoot down the theories eminating from the gathered evidence.

The main reason why I don't think they could have done it - is because based on the evidence available there simply is no motive. End of. Abduction is not fantasy - it may be very rare but it does happen.


However Merrymo's attitude and pre conceived ideas about the parentss prevents her from looking at the evidence gathered objectively which is why, for example, the dogs are wrong and their results and methods disparaged but on the other hand, we are to believe that a gang with a key for 1 apartment waited months to find a family with a child just right for abduction, then somehow in no time got one or two people in and out again wihtout leaving a trace and no evidence behind.

So Merrymo is happy to dismiss out of hand the possibility that the evidence the dogs found (supported by forensic material) is bogus, wrong and impossible yet advocates gangs runnning around PDL with keys and associates.

I didnt say the dogs were wrong. I said (amongst other things) that even if a death scent was detected by them at 5a, there was no way of knowing who it belonged to or how it got there. A death scent does not necessarily mean a dead body was ever there. Read Martin Grimes report for confirmation of that. No forensic samples were linked to Madeleine. There was no DNA match and nothing was found in any other sample taken that could be linked to her.

If you think it is impossible that a gang who may have been commissioned to commit probably the worst crime in the world and maybe involving huge sums of money, would not invest a great deal of planning into it - then I am amazed.


It's sheer lunacy.

It doesn't matter how daft the theory or how little evidence there is Merrymo believes they are innocent no matter what and so has to concoct these outlandish theories in order to justify and re-affirm her belief in their innoncence.

Well may I ask you to give me your theory of what happened? Because to date I have never heard a whole theory(from beginning to end) proposed by anyone who thinks the McCanns are the guilty party - that didn't crash and burn under scrutiny.

So far I have heard (not on here) that:

Her parents hated her and went to Portugal specifically to kill her.

She was sacrificed by order of the Masons,

She died accidentally in the apartment - and they decided to get rid of her body.

She was given an overdose of Calpol (or whatever) and they decided to get rid of her body.

She was sold to a paedaphile gang.

So what is your theory ME -or anyone else here for that matter. I'm really interested to know.

I'm not even sure she'd believe they were guilty even if the team gave a confession live on TV.

Oh believe me, if the McCanns were found guilty I would be the first to say lock them up and throw away the key.

Finally, it you are so certain that they did it, and that there is ample evidence to prove it - then why are they still walking about free? Why has the review been granted?

Also - if they have got away with such a terrible crime, then why didn't they breathe a huge sigh of relief - thank their lucky stars, go home and keep as low a profile as possible until it all faded from the public eye with the passage of time. .. If they have got something to hide - then why do everything in their power to keep it in the public mind with the accompanying permanent risk of it being 'discovered'. ..

There is no logic or reason in that whatsoever.

IMHO

Also - if they have got away with such a terrible crime, then why didn't they breathe a huge sigh of relief - thank their lucky stars, go home and keep as low a profile as possible until it all faded from the public eye with the passage of time. .. If they have got something to hide - then why do everything in their power to keep it in the public mind with the accompanying permanent risk of it being 'discovered'. ..

aiyoyo wrote:

tiny wrote:I think it would be a good idea if merrymo read the files,she/he would save herself a lot of embarrassment,or perhaps she /he doesnt mind because she is not here for Madeleine and the truth.

She probably has read the files and apprised herself from data out there, otherwise why would she join forum?
I dont believe she has not read about the case in depth and that she's just here to give us her fantasy land and outlandish land story.
I've never in my life heard anyone with intellect come out with such a ridiculous idea as a criminal mastermind in a suicidal attempt job of snatching a child at the wrong place wrong time.

That maddie mysterious disappearance is a criminal mastermind work of long planning is so laughable.
However, having said that, there is one feature that is work of a criminal mastermind, and that is the cover up job. Here we're looking at a novice gang with wit, definitely not seasoned.

rainbow-fairy wrote:

Me wrote:

rainbow-fairy wrote:

tiny wrote:good post Me.I like to read these debates,but bloody hell Merrymo is making right prat of herself/himself.

Agreed tiny. And well said Me. But, like herpes, I fear Merrymo will return...
It was funny for a while but the joke is wearing thin now. Why has nobody pressed the button yet?
I am yearning for the day when we get a 'Pro' who actually says something NEW, something sensible!
I am sorry to say I think my yearning will be thwarted. What CAN they say? No evidence to back it up is the problem.

Well i don't mind Merrymo being here because the more we hear from her the more we can see the paucity of debate and absurdity of theory the Pro's have.

Let me tell you how Merrymo holds the opinions she has.

She, like many others, decided long ago that the Mccann's are good people. She has no direct knowledge of them but she (thinks she) knows in her heart of hearts that they could not have done the things they are accused of.

She has no evidence to back this up but it's how she feels about them.

Because Merrymo is convinced they can't have done it she needs to come up with these fantasy land explanations in an attempt to shoot down the theories eminating from the gathered evidence.

However Merrymo's attitude and pre conceived ideas about the parentss prevents her from looking at the evidence gathered objectively which is why, for example, the dogs are wrong and their results and methods disparaged but on the other hand, we are to believe that a gang with a key for 1 apartment waited months to find a family with a child just right for abduction, then somehow in no time got one or two people in and out again wihtout leaving a trace and no evidence behind.

So Merrymo is happy to dismiss out of hand the possibility that the evidence the dogs found (supported by forensic material) is bogus, wrong and impossible yet advocates gangs runnning around PDL with keys and associates.

It's sheer lunacy.

It doesn't matter how daft the theory or how little evidence there is Merrymo believes they are innocent no matter what and so has to concoct these outlandish theories in order to justify and re-affirm her belief in their innoncence.

I'm not even sure she'd believe they were guilty even if the team gave a confession live on TV.

Me, you raise a very important point (one I've been thinking about more and more lately)

The rabid Pro-McCanns, how will they feel WHEN (I'm being positive) not IF it is proven they lied through their teeth? I have a suspicion that many of them WON'T believe it! That is how sucked in to the fantasy they are.

Its truly terrifying to think people can be so naive.


At least Merrymo being here shows up the true absurdity of the Pro's stance - it's just a case of I want to hear something different... just the same old s**t about clever, professional gangs targeting 5A (so clever they wait til the Thursday when the T9 allegedly stepped up patrol? P-lease...)

Its just tedious, and shows how far their desire for the T9 to be innocent totally lambasts their reasoning powers.

worriedmum wrote:

Merrymo wrote:

anil39200 wrote:Merrymo,
Would you mind answering a couple of questions please?



They physically searched themselves during the early morning of May 4th. During the ensuing days they were mainly involved with the police etc. They were aware that others were searching at that time. .. Once the press arrived it was a pointless exercise to even try to search themselves IMO.

The only publicity they have sought is to keep their daughter's profile high in the public's mind.

Hello again Merrymo,

have you thought of looking at other evidence apart from Kate Mccann's book? For instance, what do you think of this ( VERY EARLY ) interview with the BBC? it predates the book. Do you think Kate is saying that they went out and looked?

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