Re: The most sensible theory so far

by bunny 18.02.10 11:30

I sometimes wonder if posters judge others by their own standards thinking

by Kololi 18.02.10 16:45

Hi Bunny
I think you have a point with your comment.

I know that I get so twitchy about the leaving them part because I didn't do that to my own and I would be down on my children like a ton of bricks if they ever have kiddies and I thought they were doing it.

We have recently had some bad news and the first thing that I did was busy myself looking up my relevant law manuals and information on the internet so that I felt a little more in control of the situation.

Now there had been times when my eyes popped out on stalks e.g when Mr and Mrs McCann took themselves off jogging and believe me, their "problem" was one million times worse than what we face at the moment. I still needed to feel that I was doing something positive and after all this time I think through my own experience my eyes would stay firmly in their sockets now if I saw the photos of them jogging again.

We think we know how we will behave under certain circumstances so judge others or we have experienced something similar to another person but behaved differently from them so judge that their reaction can't be right.

I suppose it is simply the nature of the beast - human nature.

Take care

by sijm 29.11.11 16:56

Hello everyone

I have asked myself more than once, If peadphiles wanted to take a child, then why not one off the streets or in the orphanages of the Algarve, God knows there are enought of the poor little darlings like those poor little ones in the Casa Pia scaandel and why Madeleine?

Her parents are so high profiles with links to Blairs Nuclear and Media control programe,Its almost like they are laughting at us while their little girl is no more.

My theory is tied in with many of the posts and blogs that have been on the net between links to the Mcs and other people in close proximity.

Maybe it had passed, that the alleged sighting of Gerry when he was seen carrying Maddie towards the area where the church is located it was not to the church he was supposedly taking her it was to the fort underground dungeons leading up to the restaurant.

Its interesting how somone said Murats Brother Ralph Eveliegh had links to the jaz band who played in the grounds of the old Fort and even a person who attended a church service said they could hear the Jaz band quite loud in the church, so it is very close to the church

The old Fort having a restaurant would have large freezers big enought to keep a body in also there was a report of a Polish couple seen in the restaurant, he had with shoulder lenght hair and a girl who was his partner, a similar girl was reportedly pictured in Ralph Evelights B/B villa.

Another interesting poster wrote how Father Heinz Hubbard owns a holiday let and allegedly that is where Mcs stayed for a while while waiting for suitable accommodation to come up. what is more interesting when advertising the property to let for 2008, Mrs Hubbard states new beds and FREEZER. Now if the body was shifted from one freezer to another smaller cold storage for a short while, no doub it would start to thaw out quiite a bit. hence maybe new freezer and hence Gerry's rotting meat in car explanation, This my theory goes I think wouldhave happened late June/July.

Suggestions have been put forward on this site that the body may have been embalmed, well why not, it would keep the body from leaking.

Upon having to leave Hubbard's loaned apartment and rent a Villa, maybe the body (if there was one) had again had to be moved to a safe location for a short while where the embalming procedure could be carried out, mentioned more than once is a remote barn where this may have been the case.

A barn was mentioned in Psychic Amanda Harts dreams where she stated she saw a helicopter fly over and police cars and she stated Maddie is at last at peace.Ms Hart has lived in that region workin on an Atlantis project she says in her blogof , she also set up Amber Connextions a few days before Madeleine Disapeared in Praia da Luz and herself had a four year old child taken from her.

Once the problem of a decaying body had been dealt with all that remains is for person who helped embalm the body to transport it to more cunning place, because of close serveillance of the Mcs since under suspicion of concealing a body and if the body was discovered, they could actually blame Peadophiles,( how they could explain away the embalming is anyones guess) and it was after all a temporay hiding place until they had somone to transport the body to Heulva. (sorry maybe wrong spelling)Once in Heulva (sorry wrong spelling) transport by train to England to collection point on to a church crypt near home hence the toy train in Madeleines home shrine. Maybe rubbish but this is my theory.

by Nina 29.11.11 23:16

Hi Sijm, some interesting reading there re the restaurant near the church, never read anything about that before. Re embalming. This has to be done straight after death, not days later as the blood is drained and replaced with embalming fluid. If not straight after death the blood has clotted so impossible to drain.

Admin sorry for the detail but it is the best way I can say it.

by sijm 30.11.11 11:55

Hello Nina

Thank you for that valuble information on embalming, I hate talking about little Madeleine

in this line of conversation but I believe if we are convinced she is dead, the next thinking

would be where she is now, after all we are all looking to find Maddie alive or dead so as to bring justice

to those who did not honour her, by giving her a decent human buriel.

If this was an accident, it is my belief they would want a place of homage and this would be close to home.

I do not believe Maddie is still in Portugal one more thing interests me about the embalming and it is quite a bizzare

question to ask, would the body remain the same, have the same flexability or would it be stiff and woud it retain the same color.

I once had an aunt who my mother said was enbamled after her death and she looked beautiful. is this true?

Sorry about the mode but it would be quite helpful if you could give me this information to develop my theory.

Sorry about errors in typing my eyes are not as youn as they were.

by sijm 30.11.11 12:08

Hello Nina

Thank you for that valuble information on embalming, I hate talking about little Madelline this line of conversation

but I believe if we are convinced she is dead, the next thinking would be where she is now, after all we are all looking to

find Maddie alive or dead so as to bring justice to those who did not honour her by giving her a decent human buriel.

If this was an accident, it is my belief they would want a place of homage and this would be close to home.

I do not believe Maddie is still in Portugal and one more thing that interests me about the embalming and it is quite a bizzare

question to ask, would the body remain the same after embalming, would it have the same flexability and woud it retain the same colour?

I once had an aunt who my mother said was enbalmed after her death and she looked beautiful. is this true?

Sorry about the mode of thinking but it would be quite helpful if you could give me this information to develop my theory.

Sorry about errors in typing my eyes are not as young as they were.

by sijm 30.11.11 12:17

I am so sorry for the double post![You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Nina 30.11.11 15:51

sijm wrote:Hello Nina

Thank you for that valuble information on embalming, I hate talking about little Madeleine

in this line of conversation but I believe if we are convinced she is dead, the next thinking

would be where she is now, after all we are all looking to find Maddie alive or dead so as to bring justice

to those who did not honour her, by giving her a decent human buriel.

If this was an accident, it is my belief they would want a place of homage and this would be close to home.

I do not believe Maddie is still in Portugal one more thing interests me about the embalming and it is quite a bizzare

question to ask, would the body remain the same, have the same flexability or would it be stiff and woud it retain the same color.

I once had an aunt who my mother said was enbamled after her death and she looked beautiful. is this true?

Sorry about the mode but it would be quite helpful if you could give me this information to develop my theory.

Sorry about errors in typing my eyes are not as youn as they were.

Hi Sijm, re old eyed mine are ancient.

I agree it is very difficult speaking of Madeleine, in fact any child that has died. So I try to say things in a gentle way but the facts are sometimes very difficult to write about.

You ask about colour. When a person dies if they are not moved the blood drains to the lowest

part of the body, gravity. So id a person dies sat up the blood drains to the legs and bottom. If they are laid on their back the blood drains to the back of the body and the back of the legs, gravity. If the person dies laid on their stomach, the blood drains to their stomach as this is the lowest part. If the person dies laid on their right sied then gravity makes the blood drain to their right side, the lowest part of the body. This draining looks like a dark bruise. The rest of the body would be very pale as their is little or no blood under the skin. This is of course if the person is white skinned.

Re the body being stiff. This is rigor that you are meaning I think. Rigor is the muscles toghtening up and usually starts at the face and neck. In babies and very young children there may not be much in the way of rigor due to there being little muscle mass. Rigor builds up over the whole body but over time will disperse.

Embalming is a way of making the body as hygienic as possible and also does help to make the person look very alive if you like as their color is very similar to that as when they were alive. However undertakers do also use makeup to make the deceased look more presentable.

As an aside but maybe relevant, the Smith sighting it was said that the child was pale. The way the carrier was carrying the child showed the back of her legs and they were pale so lividity must have been on the front of the child if in fact it was a dead child being carried which means the child was on its front at death and remained there, or, being doctors they would know how to break up the effect by massage.

by sijm 30.11.11 19:53

Thank you so much Nina and I do regret asking such a horrid question, you answered it with great sensitivity and it was exactly as I hoped it would be Why I have asked such a disturbing question has several factors that could be interesting.

Suposing Madeline is dead and she was embalmed not long after her death and hid in a hole or drain would it not be a risk that a wild animal could have located her remains and possibly been poisoned by the chemicals involved and died near the spot where the body was hidden, (Kate mentioned wild dogs in the region in her book}

So whoever had responsibility for careing for the body they would have needed to keep it stored in dense cool, dry temperatures in a safe place untill repatriation to England, because burying the body would have been a waste of time and effort in embalming it in the first place.

I still plumb for the cool dark dungeons of the old Fort , one thought is the Fort maybe linked underground to the Church by way of tunnels, if so, a perfect way to visit the body via the church.

Something tells me something happened in the latter part of June when the body had to be moved to a temporary location, somewhere where it could be kept cool, dry and yet out of reach of animal preditors in some sort of suspension possibly somwher where DNA would be difficult for dogs to detect, possibly very close to the location Dannie Krugal mapped out as the area Madeleine could be found, but of course by the time they did the search with Dannie the body had been removed, possibly escorted back to UK via air or fraight train for fear of finding it.

22June 2007 Maddie had been missing over 50 day and a balloon event took place in Praia, I read this was sponsered by the Sun Paper an interesting date to note for later.

More nteresting reading on Gerry's public blog, 24th June 2007, He said they needed to move out of the appartment they had been staying in. Was this Hubbards apartment Gerry was talking about, the one that later advertised New Beds, New Fridge?

On 30th June 2007, He confirmed their new accommodation and they were moving in next few days.

2nd July 2007, Gerry tells us they had completed the move to new accommodation and states there should be some stuff in press but he was aware that recent terroist activity will be rightly dominate the news.

Late June was a moving time for the family and also I suspect for Madeleine, this is my theory and I hope it makes some sense.

by Guest 01.12.11 9:13

sijm wrote:Suposing Madeline is dead and she was embalmed not long after her death

I would say without any hesitation, that is completely impossible, so we can put that one to bed. Her bodily fluids, with 15 markers matching to her profile, was found in the hire car, three weeks after she disappeared.

by sijm 01.12.11 18:54

Hi Stella

Thank you so much for the clarity, Sorry for the delay just got home from shift work.

by sijm 02.12.11 14:53

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

About my theory and Smiths supposed sighting of GM carrying Madeline towards the direction of the old Fort /Chapel.

I just had a worrying thought, If GM was transporting a deceased Maddie, would'nt he have had cadaver on his clothing and are we too assume because cadaver was traced on Kate's clothes, that she alone handled Madeleine's heavy body, like carried it to the car, switched the body from one cooler to another, while Gerry just watched?

Something is very strange here, mainly how no cadaver at all was found on GM belongings, like soles of his/her training shoes or his clothes after carrying a supposedly dead body, the blood specs on shoes especially, after cleaning blood off tiles behind the sofa.

These are details the defence would have a ball with if the case ever went to court, it also makes a big difference to any theories likemine, so, are the Smiths to be trusted one hundred percent in being sure it was GM who was carrying that child?
One more thing bothers me, if anyone has read Kate's diaries she mentions a drunk man who supposedly laid down in the path of their car when Kate picked up GM from the airport on the 20th of June 2007, GM wallked him back to his appartment.

Could this man have been a helper they had aquired to move the body and he was collecting his payoff, after GM had filled up his holiday expenditure cash fund from the funds base back in UK, he did by all accounts call into see them and sort a few things out.

If this was the case this would have given GM an alliby, if someone had moved the body from one location to another and hid it in a place where they hoped it would be found, the priority for moving the body being having served notice to leave their temporary accomodation, on the other hand the guy who laid in front of the car could have been a sicko who wanted to see the McCanns faces after what he had done to Maddy.

by pennylane 02.12.11 15:19

sijm wrote:Heollo Everyone[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

About my theory and Smiths supposed sighting of GM carrying Madeline towards the direction of the old Fort /Chapel.

I just had a worrying thought, If GM was transporting a deceased Maddie, would'nt he have had cadaver on his clothing and are we too assume because cadaver was traced on Kate's clothes, that she alone handled Madeleine's heavy body, like carried it to the car, switched the body from one cooler to another, while Gerry just watched?

Something is very strange here, mainly how no cadaver at all was found on GM belongings, like soles of his/her training shoes or his clothes after carrying a supposedly dead body, the blood specs on shoes especially, after cleaning blood off tiles behind the sofa.

These are details the defence would have a ball with if the case ever went to court, it also makes a big difference to any theories likemine, so, are the Smiths to be trusted one hundred percent in being sure it was GM who was carrying that child?

One more thing bothers me, if anyone has read Kate's diaries she mentions a drunk man who supposedly laid down in the path of their car when Kate picked up Gerry from the airport, could he have been a helper they had aquired and he was collection his payoff, that would have given GM an alliby if someone had moved the body from one location to another after having notice to leave their temporary accomodation or maybe it was a sicko who wanted to see their faces after what he had done to Maddy.

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

Answering part of your question, as I too believe the Smith's saw GM on 3rd May 2007 carrying Maddie:

If I were to put myself in GM's position under such a lethal set of circumstances.... I would make very sure I got rid of any items of clothing that the family I ran into might have noticed me wearing and could identify me by, as this would further assist the police in their case against me.

I would beg JT to give me an alibi by claiming she saw me and the abductor at the same time, and I would warn her that if she didn't all would be lost and that she and her partner would end up in the dock along side myself and my wife; and at the same time I would rid myself of those identifiable clothes.

Then I would pray like a praying mantis. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by sijm 02.12.11 18:23

Thank you so much for your answer Pennylane.

Penny Lane is one of my favorite songs, don.t make them like that anymore, Up The Fab Four.

I still would like to find out about that extraordinary encounter the Mcs had with that drunk and if it was to mutual benefit to the two parties.

I did some snooping and if we take what that Twitter said about finding an image of a human on Praia da Luz beach seriously, which I don't!

Then the date he said he found the Image of a body in a rock cavern was 22nd of June 2007, which would tie in with my own theory, but I can't find his post now, I think he has deleted it now, can anyone can help.

by Guest 03.12.11 8:52

sijm wrote:Heollo Everyone[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

About my theory and Smiths supposed sighting of GM carrying Madeline towards the direction of the old Fort /Chapel.

I just had a worrying thought, If GM was transporting a deceased Maddie, would'nt he have had cadaver on his clothing and are we too assume because cadaver was traced on Kate's clothes, that she alone handled Madeleine's heavy body, like carried it to the car, switched the body from one cooler to another, while Gerry just watched?

Something is very strange here, mainly how no cadaver at all was found on GM belongings, like soles of his/her training shoes or his clothes after carrying a supposedly dead body, the blood specs on shoes especially, after cleaning blood off tiles behind the sofa.

Have you ever considered that Gerry could have thrown clothing away or left them in Rothley when he went back there?

These are details the defence would have a ball with if the case ever went to court,

Not really, they would just consider the above.

it also makes a big difference to any theories likemine, so, are the Smiths to be trusted one hundred percent in being sure it was GM who was carrying that child?

Nothing can be 100%. But having said that, if I had seen a mans face, then 3 days later this same face was splashed all over every news station day and night, I am pretty certain I would have phoned the Police then. Not 4+ months later.
One more thing bothers me, if anyone has read Kate's diaries she mentions a drunk man who supposedly laid down in the path of their car when Kate picked up GM from the airport on the 20th of June 2007, GM wallked him back to his appartment.Could this man have been a helper they had aquired to move the body and he was collecting his payoff,

No.

after GM had filled up his holiday expenditure cash fund from the funds base back in UK, he did by all accounts call into see them and sort a few things out. If this was the case this would have given GM an alliby, if someone had moved the body from one location to another and hid it in a place where they hoped it would be found, the priority for moving the body being having served notice to leave their temporary accomodation, on the other hand the guy who laid in front of the car could have been a sicko who wanted to see the McCanns faces after what he had done to Maddy.

I would think like most other things, this story has been made up.

by **PeterMac** 03.12.11 9:01

Occam's Razor needs stropping again.

by Guest 03.12.11 9:11

PeterMac wrote:Occam's Razor needs stropping again.

I have no idea what this 'occam's razor' is, having seen it mentioned many, many times before. Perhaps I am not alone in wondering what it really means. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Stropping sounds a bit kinky !!

by Guest 03.12.11 9:19

I didn't know either Stella!

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

by Guest 03.12.11 9:32

Thanks Marian, but that is way to deep for me at this time of the morning. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by joyce1938 03.12.11 9:58

stella, i think that mr smith was very open and admitted he did not see g m s face properly at all ,so he says the only way that elerted him was down plane steps as they got back,and thwe wlking carrying stance that elerted him,pity you gave up any other sitr stella, i find a lot of discussion on other sites too,shame it can get a bit upsetting from one to another at times on some sites,just have to find a way to let some go,but i can understand most keep to one site maybe.sncerely joyce1938

by Guest 03.12.11 10:13

If Mr Smith did not see the face properly Joyce, how could he have confirmed it was not Robert Murat? In fact, why bring Robert Murat's name into the discussion in the first place? I know he claimed it was only after seeing Gerry carrying a twin down the steps that helped him to remember, but to be honest, there is only two ways to carry a child. Over your shoulder and across both arms. It's hardly enlightening.

by joyce1938 03.12.11 10:18

Hi stella thanks for your reply. dont understand either why mr smith would speak at that time of murratt,will need to reread i guess,so much to take in at times that i do have to refresh to see the wood for the tree joyce1938

by rainbow-fairy 03.12.11 10:56

Stella wrote:If Mr Smith did not see the face properly Joyce, how could he have confirmed it was not Robert Murat? In fact, why bring Robert Murat's name into the discussion in the first place? I know he claimed it was only after seeing Gerry carrying a twin down the steps that helped him to remember, but to be honest, there is only two ways to carry a child. Over your shoulder and across both arms. It's hardly enlightening.

That's an easy one Stella. If we take into account the reasons why some believe this 'sighting' was concocted to help Murat (as Smith knew/knew of Murat) by very virtue of his knowing him he would know instantly and instinctively it wasn't Murat. You don't need to see faces to know, mannerisms are enough - didn't Murat have a distinctive gait? Why he mentioned Murat at all is another matter and neither here nor there in relation to being able to tell who someone isn't. If you get me! Wink

by Guest 03.12.11 11:48

Stella wrote:Thanks Marian, but that is way to deep for me at this time of the morning. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

You and me both! The most straightforward summary that I can find is "The simplest of two or more competing theories is preferable and that an explanation for unknown phenomena should first be attempted in terms of what is already known".

It's ironic that the explanation for a term intending to simplify things is so mind-boggingly complicated!