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, 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!

pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by Mrs Beeton on 18.02.13 20:19

@bobbin wrote:
@tigger wrote:
@joyce1938 wrote:I think the subject of the kids going up the stairs ,was spoken of by the cleaner it was that one child was carrying a plate with bread on and the mum was carrying the other 2 kids plates ,supposedly to join the family above for lunch,?mum and kids dad came out little later and went too. Had trainers on with lights too. joyce1938

There's no guarantee that it was Maddie. The trainers would surely have been ideal to take DNA from? So where were they because only 'communal sandals were offered for DNA. Trainers are seen in the playground photos and in the airport bus.
She had trainers, she can't have been wearing them in bed, where did they go?

A Eureka moment. The loving couple of kindly paedophiles, after jimmying the shutters and forcing the window open, packed ALL of Madeleine's things up in the blue bag (including toothbrush), then cleaned up the mess and made the bed again, folding the corner over neatly, so that Kate would know that she was going to a good, tidy home and that Maddie would be able to adjust to her new life so much more easily if she had all of her familiar things with her.
Just a pity about the cuddle cat and the pink blanket. We know where cuddle cat went but the blanket is still a mystery.

Maybe the aforesaid kindly paedophile couple came back for the blanket later when Mr and Mrs Mc Cann were out searching - at 6am wasn't it in one account of the 'truth' ? Sorry I know that this is in really poor taste but I just read the news about them failing to reach a settlement with GA and I'm feeling a bit light headed !

Mrs Beeton

Posts : 32
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-01-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by tigger on 18.02.13 21:43

Allegedly ALL the shutters were down. This includes the shutters on the patio doors. Rachel M. was very definite in one of her interviews that this was the case. The shutters on the patio doors were down.
So how was using the patio doors going to be less noisy than entering through the front door? A problem only encountered when the window shutters proved to be useless.
I'm just mentioning this here because I don't see it often. Yet it is in the files.
On the famous hurried timeline (all shutters down) and in RM's interview which specifically mentions the patio shutters.
Everything it seems, depended on the window as it would have made the parents less 'guilty'. All the doors were closed/locked safely, but no one ever thought the window might be dangerous/used etc.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by bobbin on 18.02.13 23:00

@tigger wrote:Allegedly ALL the shutters were down. This includes the shutters on the patio doors. Rachel M. was very definite in one of her interviews that this was the case. The shutters on the patio doors were down.
So how was using the patio doors going to be less noisy than entering through the front door? A problem only encountered when the window shutters proved to be useless.
I'm just mentioning this here because I don't see it often. Yet it is in the files.
On the famous hurried timeline (all shutters down) and in RM's interview which specifically mentions the patio shutters.
Everything it seems, depended on the window as it would have made the parents less 'guilty'. All the doors were closed/locked safely, but no one ever thought the window might be dangerous/used etc.

I still have a vague memory that Jez Wilkins said something about seeing Gerry fiddling near the window.
Gerry says in a statement or interview that PdL was so quiet you never saw anyone out or about at night-time.
Jez indicated that he thought he'd met Gerry to talk, about 8.45, or before 9, but then seems to have to go with the later time.
If it was Jane Tanner, in purple, standing around watching the entrance of 5a, perhaps she was to alert.
One couple thought they heard calling out for Madeleine before 9.
Did Jane alert Gerry of Jez' imminent arrival, immediately crossing the road (in my opinion from the front door of the house) to go to 'chat' to Jez.
When the tapas friend went to Jez after midnight to say M had gone missing, and did he know anything. Perhaps they were fishing to find out what he'd seen going on. He said he didn't, and was told, when offering to help, no there is nothing you can do.
He could have joined the search like so many others had that night.
I reckon the plan to stage-set the break-in was thwarted by, of all nights, someone being out and about.
The plan tried to go ahead, Philomena blurting info out that she could only have got from her brother, either that night, or by part of the pre-planned agenda.
Gerry must have known that the claim that the shutters were jemmied was a lie, so why on earth go on with that bit of the script.
Jane had gone back to her 'sick' child. Then she was in her apartment for Fiona to tell her that Madeleine was missing. Had Jane not gone back to dinner but stayed in flat since her 9 p.m. check.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by Inspectorfrost on 18.02.13 23:24

@tigger wrote:Allegedly ALL the shutters were down. This includes the shutters on the patio doors. Rachel M. was very definite in one of her interviews that this was the case. The shutters on the patio doors were down.
So how was using the patio doors going to be less noisy than entering through the front door? A problem only encountered when the window shutters proved to be useless.
I'm just mentioning this here because I don't see it often. Yet it is in the files.
On the famous hurried timeline (all shutters down) and in RM's interview which specifically mentions the patio shutters.
Everything it seems, depended on the window as it would have made the parents less 'guilty'. All the doors were closed/locked safely, but no one ever thought the window might be dangerous/used etc.
I don't think RO said all the Mccann shutters were down

Fiona Payne though tells the LP that she checked if the shutters could be opened from outside, the patio door ones, why WOULD she? When Kate Mccann told her at dinner that night that she was worried about leaving the patio doors unlocked? Did the Mccanns lower the patio door shutters? As well as leaving the door open?
No, that cant be true as you cant raise those massive heavy shutters from outside and why do so if you were concerned about waking the kids, which they said they didnt want to do, thats why they switched from entering via the front door to patio door,what a load of bollox
FP
Reply    “At that point, Gerry, I don’t think was in the apartment, it was mainly Kate.  And Kate was just, huh, utter disbelief and I had disbelief, thinking she’s got to be here, you know, what, how can this have happened.  And by that point Kate was already saying that the, what she’d found when she’d gone back, which was that the, she’d found the window open and the shutter open and she was convinced at that point that somebody had taken, taken Madeleine and that’s what she was telling me and I was like ‘They can’t have done.  They can’t have done this’, you know.  And I looked, I looked throughout the whole apartment and I looked in all the cupboards, under the drawers, under the beds, behind the curtains, everywhere, erm, just, you know, trying to, knowing it had already been done, but you just do.  Erm, tut, I looked, when I went into the room that Madeleine was sleeping in, the room was dark, Madeleine, erm, Madeleine’s bed was sort of folded back, the sheets, quite kind of neatly really, erm, Sean and Amelie were fast asleep in their cots, they didn’t stir, you know, I was opening the cupboards in the room and moving around the room, they didn’t stir at all, which that was, that was odd.  Erm, we were trying to ascertain whether Madeleine could have got out, and I’ve already said earlier the shutters were very heavy, and I was almost trying to convince Kate that she could have opened the shutter and climbed out, although knowing that wasn’t a likely thing, but at that point we were just trying to pacify Kate in that Madeleine was going to be alright.  Erm, and I, I think I touched the webbing in that room, but because Sean and Amelie were asleep, I didn’t actually open the shutter in that room, we went, I went to the front of the house and I was trying to lift the shutter at the, at the back, just to prove whether, you know, whether it could have been opened and whether Madeleine could have opened it from the inside”.
1485    “And?”
Reply    “I mean, it was fairly obviously, I think, that that wasn’t what had happened and what could have happened”.
1485    “So what did you do, walk out of the apartment and round the other side then?”
Reply    “No, I”.
1485    “Or did you do it from the inside?”
Reply    “I did it from, I’m talking about, so, again, the back or the front, I did it from the back, which is where their balcony was”.
sarcastic





Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-12-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by bobbin on 18.02.13 23:34

@Inspectorfrost wrote:
@tigger wrote:Allegedly ALL the shutters were down. This includes the shutters on the patio doors. Rachel M. was very definite in one of her interviews that this was the case. The shutters on the patio doors were down.
So how was using the patio doors going to be less noisy than entering through the front door? A problem only encountered when the window shutters proved to be useless.
I'm just mentioning this here because I don't see it often. Yet it is in the files.
On the famous hurried timeline (all shutters down) and in RM's interview which specifically mentions the patio shutters.
Everything it seems, depended on the window as it would have made the parents less 'guilty'. All the doors were closed/locked safely, but no one ever thought the window might be dangerous/used etc.
I don't think RO said all the Mccann shutters were down

Fiona Payne though tells the LP that she checked if the shutters could be opened from outside, the patio door ones, why WOULD she? When Kate Mccann told her at dinner that night that she was worried about leaving the patio doors unlocked? Did the Mccanns lower the patio door shutters? As well as leaving the door open?
No, that cant be true as you cant raise those massive heavy shutters from outside and why do so if you were concerned about waking the kids, which they said they didnt want to do, thats why they switched from entering via the front door to patio door,what a load of bollox
FP
Reply “At that point, Gerry, I don’t think was in the apartment, it was mainly Kate. And Kate was just, huh, utter disbelief and I had disbelief, thinking she’s got to be here, you know, what, how can this have happened. And by that point Kate was already saying that the, what she’d found when she’d gone back, which was that the, she’d found the window open and the shutter open and she was convinced at that point that somebody had taken, taken Madeleine and that’s what she was telling me and I was like ‘They can’t have done. They can’t have done this’, you know. And I looked, I looked throughout the whole apartment and I looked in all the cupboards, under the drawers, under the beds, behind the curtains, everywhere, erm, just, you know, trying to, knowing it had already been done, but you just do. Erm, tut, I looked, when I went into the room that Madeleine was sleeping in, the room was dark, Madeleine, erm, Madeleine’s bed was sort of folded back, the sheets, quite kind of neatly really, erm, Sean and Amelie were fast asleep in their cots, they didn’t stir, you know, I was opening the cupboards in the room and moving around the room, they didn’t stir at all, which that was, that was odd. Erm, we were trying to ascertain whether Madeleine could have got out, and I’ve already said earlier the shutters were very heavy, and I was almost trying to convince Kate that she could have opened the shutter and climbed out, although knowing that wasn’t a likely thing, but at that point we were just trying to pacify Kate in that Madeleine was going to be alright. Erm, and I, I think I touched the webbing in that room, but because Sean and Amelie were asleep, I didn’t actually open the shutter in that room, we went, I went to the front of the house and I was trying to lift the shutter at the, at the back, just to prove whether, you know, whether it could have been opened and whether Madeleine could have opened it from the inside”.
1485 “And?”
Reply “I mean, it was fairly obviously, I think, that that wasn’t what had happened and what could have happened”.
1485 “So what did you do, walk out of the apartment and round the other side then?”
Reply “No, I”.
1485 “Or did you do it from the inside?”
Reply “I did it from, I’m talking about, so, again, the back or the front, I did it from the back, which is where their balcony was”.


So the children's shutter was closed, according to Rachel, then she went to the front of the house to try to open the shutter at the back of the house.
Blinking Ada, was this after the wine, or something else to

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by Inspectorfrost on 18.02.13 23:43

Bobbin it was Fiona who said she went to the front of the house at the balcony to see how easy it would be to raise the shutters, having reread all that think I may have been wrong, she went there to test them because she didnt want to test the ones in the kids bedroom so as not to wake them up, how concerned of her when their own father and her mother tried the same outside the kids bedroom

Still bollox though all in all

You search for a child gone missing you dont go contaminating evidence if you think they were abducted and tryingto figure out how

Before searching and before calling police, pile of useless nonces



Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-12-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by Guest on 18.02.13 23:44

Inspector Frost RO did say the McCanns shutters were down on the patio door




RACHEL MAMPILLY OLDFIELD WITNESS STATEMENT 15 May



The window shutters of the McCann's apartment were closed. The patio door that they used to enter the apartment also had its shutter closed. In order to enter they had to raise the shutter.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html#tap15
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by bobbin on 18.02.13 23:47

candyfloss wrote:Inspector Frost RO did say the McCanns shutters were down on the patio door




RACHEL MAMPILLY OLDFIELD WITNESS STATEMENT 15 May



The window shutters of the McCann's apartment were closed. The patio door that they used to enter the apartment also had its shutter closed. In order to enter they had to raise the shutter.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html#tap15

Thanks for that candyfloss and IF.
I did mix up Rachel and Fiona in my last post, but I did also think that Rachel had claimed the shutters were down.
That makes two witnesses to foul up Gerry's pre-planned, biggest c**k up in history, agenda.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by russiandoll on 18.02.13 23:48

If the patio door shutter was down, how was Maddie meant to exit 5a? Kate said the door was closed but not locked so Maddie could get out didn't she?

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy

avatar
russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by bobbin on 18.02.13 23:53

@russiandoll wrote:If the patio door shutter was down, how was Maddie meant to exit 5a? Kate said the door was closed but not locked so Maddie could get out didn't she?
good point, which means that people couldn't go in and out of open patio door, and Gerry would then have had to use the front door which he initially claimed, before he changed it when the shutters were shown not to have been jemmied. This then puts him at the front of the house, for entry via main door, which fits more with my 'way back impression' that Jez had remarked that he'd seen Gerry fiddling by the shutter.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by Inspectorfrost on 18.02.13 23:59

Bobbin thanks

Erm, and I, I think I touched the webbing in that room, but because Sean and Amelie were asleep, I didn’t actually open the shutter in that room, we went, I went to the front of the house and I was trying to lift the shutter at the, at the back, just to prove whether, you know, whether it could have been opened and whether Madeleine could have opened it from the inside”.

That doesnt make sense. Whether it could have been opened? Whether it could have been opened from inside Er yes, thats what you do with shutters, you open them from inside.


Thanks Candyfloss for that RO quote, so apart from thr Mccanns especially Kate giving details of every two seconds about her check and NEVER mentioninghaving to raise the shutters before entering through the patio doors, let alone Matt and also O Brien who also did a check this way, and not forgetting they said they used the patio doors so as to not wake the kids by using the front door and key noise, but forcing shutters open from outside which is ridiculous, would make lots of noise, lets NOT forget, you don't raise massive shutters from the outside!!! urgh, fed up of this rubbish

Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-12-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by Inspectorfrost on 19.02.13 0:06

@russiandoll wrote:If the patio door shutter was down, how was Maddie meant to exit 5a? Kate said the door was closed but not locked so Maddie could get out didn't she?

EXACTLY, therefore the shutters could not also have been down, and KM argues a three year old couldnt have walked out as they would have had to open a dor,curtains and a stair gate but never mentioned open the shutters too!!

Then some think Maddie was superhuman, arguing she was a good swimmer, so if she fell in the pool on her way to the tapas bar go find her mum and dad, groggy with sleep, it would have been fine, yes, you read that right, the lengths that some have gone to on other forums to apologise for leaving toddlers on their own

Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-12-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by tigger on 19.02.13 7:59

What gets me from Fiona's statement is that she worried about waking the twins. When your best friend is hysterical, has already run round the flat and opened doors and cupboards and has established her first born is missing?
How important is it to leave children asleep in such a situation?
Next we have the checking if they're still breathing statements from Fiona. Would have been a relief if they did wake up?

Imo the ingress and exit through the window was the lynch pin of the 'story'. Because with all the doors closed and all windows shuttered, the Mark Warner method of 'listening checks' implemented with an improved frequency, there was, on the face of it little blame attached to parents who'd already been on such a holiday where everything went well.
That's where the frequent statement from Gerry comes in: 'we were naive'. I.e. they were led to believe it was safe, because it had already been done once. They 'copied' the MW listening service which they knew was not available at OC and 'improved' on it.
If that window and the shutters had been proved to be jemmied the whole thing might actually have worked.

What would the average person think? Rather stupid leaving children alone, but they couldn't have foreseen that the shuttered window was a danger - and the same system of locking children in and checking was an official method at MW resorts. Many people had done it. How could they have known? The main point about the position, height etc. of the window was that the child could not have negotiated that by herself . No parent could have seen that window and those shutters as a means of exit or entry, so runs the original story.

Add to that a sighting of the abductor in PdL, with a trail laid for the dogs he expected to be there almost immediately.

No wonder Gerry wept on the phone that it was all a 'disaster'. Didn't quite go according to the script.
Bless those pesky foreign shutters. After that it was all downhill, every new lie threw up discrepancies.



____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by bobbin on 19.02.13 9:00

@tigger wrote:What gets me from Fiona's statement is that she worried about waking the twins. When your best friend is hysterical, has already run round the flat and opened doors and cupboards and has established her first born is missing?
How important is it to leave children asleep in such a situation?
Next we have the checking if they're still breathing statements from Fiona. Would have been a relief if they did wake up?

Imo the ingress and exit through the window was the lynch pin of the 'story'. Because with all the doors closed and all windows shuttered, the Mark Warner method of 'listening checks' implemented with an improved frequency, there was, on the face of it little blame attached to parents who'd already been on such a holiday where everything went well.
That's where the frequent statement from Gerry comes in: 'we were naive'. I.e. they were led to believe it was safe, because it had already been done once. They 'copied' the MW listening service which they knew was not available at OC and 'improved' on it.
If that window and the shutters had been proved to be jemmied the whole thing might actually have worked.

What would the average person think? Rather stupid leaving children alone, but they couldn't have foreseen that the shuttered window was a danger - and the same system of locking children in and checking was an official method at MW resorts. Many people had done it. How could they have known? The main point about the position, height etc. of the window was that the child could not have negotiated that by herself . No parent could have seen that window and those shutters as a means of exit or entry, so runs the original story.

Add to that a sighting of the abductor in PdL, with a trail laid for the dogs he expected to be there almost immediately.

No wonder Gerry wept on the phone that it was all a 'disaster'. Didn't quite go according to the script.
Bless those pesky foreign shutters. After that it was all downhill, every new lie threw up discrepancies.


absolutely agree, good summary, 'downhill' after the failure to jimmy the shutters, the lynch pin.
So why did Philomena blurt the story so soon about the jimmied windows, it was almost the first news out.
Either she had been told by Gerry who KNEW WELL that they hadn't been jimmied because he'd failed to finalise that act and it wouldn't be long before the plod, hot on his heels, would arrive and say, 'what jimmied shutters ?' no damage here mate, move on, we'll look at other options.
To my mind, Philomena was too quick off the mark and hadn't been brought up to date, but then that might just be the way I see it at the moment.
What is really, blindingly clear is that there is no definite corroboration, at least in the files that have been released, nor from statements nor interviews, nor Gerry's story controlling blogs etc. that Maddie was around on the 3rd.
She was NOT on the video of the tea-time the p.m. before, whereas all the other tapas and kids were identifiable.
The iconic photos, on strange sized paper, were ready in a flash, in quantity, yet no clothes definitely belonging to Maddie could be provided to give a definite scent to dogs to go looking for her, only a towel which could have had Gerry's smells on it was provided, and where had Gerry been, where did the dogs go.
I find it unbelievable that several families, friends on holiday as a group, sharing lunches, dinners, transport, games, creches, etc. etc. in a small controlled environment, could not come up with at least a THOUSAND instances or photos, of the presence of one of their group's children, which could PINPOINT exactly when Maddie had last been seen.
Maddie must have disappeared some time back, if she had ever arrived, the placing of the Last Photo which is a clear myth (bougainvillea could not have been in flower with the cold weather noted at that time) is a serious indicator.
The photo was as staged as you like, but when so analysed and challenged by unforeseen and persistent bloggers, it has been 're-enforced' by Gerry recently claiming that the best and last memory he has of Maddie is the pool photo.
It's downhill now Gerry, a long time coming, but it's happening, as it always was going to.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by russiandoll on 19.02.13 11:06

from Tigger's post ; " They 'copied' the MW listening service which they knew was not available at OC and 'improved' on it. "

nice that you put the " improved " in quotes Tigger, because despite Kate's boast of this in her book, she and her husband give the lie to this claim . In her book Kate says it was only the more -than- it -should- have- been open bedroom door which prompted her to walk over to the bedroom for a visual check. She was tempted to turn around and walk out after ascertaining all was quiet [ a doctor should know this does not mean a child is ok ]......and Gerry in the documentary said that the evening of 3rd was the only time he looked inside the bedroom......didn't he ?

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy

avatar
russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by Mirage on 19.02.13 12:11

Yes, downhill and picking up speed nicely.

I do so pray they will one day be afforded accommodation where the shutters are only operational from the outside - and not a jemmy in sight!

Mirage

Posts : 1904
Reputation : 757
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by tigger on 19.02.13 12:38

@russiandoll wrote:from Tigger's post ; " They 'copied' the MW listening service which they knew was not available at OC and 'improved' on it. "

nice that you put the " improved " in quotes Tigger, because despite Kate's boast of this in her book, she and her husband give the lie to this claim . In her book Kate says it was only the more -than- it -should- have- been open bedroom door which prompted her to walk over to the bedroom for a visual check. She was tempted to turn around and walk out after ascertaining all was quiet [ a doctor should know this does not mean a child is ok ]......and Gerry in the documentary said that the evening of 3rd was the only time he looked inside the bedroom......didn't he ?

Well, they looked more often - every 15 minutes allegedly. But in Greece MW only listened, didn't look. These exemplary parents took the trouble to listen and sometimes look...
But what I find amusing is to follow their 'reasoning' - the window turns out to be a dead duck, so magically the patio doors of 5a open and apparently have no shutters down to prevent ingress (we don't hear about those shutters again) they could be seen from the Tapas bar. They were both closed and open at the same time as the T9 tell us. 'Closed but not locked', open then I'd say.
So if the window would have given them 10 out of 10 for child minding - the open patio door would only take a mere ten percent of that say 9 out of 10. Cue the dramatic mime/mockumentary actress KM! Hands flying, nearly deciding not to look, then looking - phew! Main ingredient of the story is the open patio door and the open bedroom door, the open window. Draughts. Now the whole lot is open, why not the front door too?
Hanging open on the 3rd, firmly shut thereafter.
There is a third way in: the front door, at a later date this is proposed as an entry as well. Due to the abductor having had a key made.
Now that we've run out of windows and doors anyone for hidden trapdoors?

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by PeterMac on 19.02.13 13:08

Which is why they will NEVER appear in court, under oath !

____________________

avatar
PeterMac
Investigator

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 174
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by Woofer on 19.02.13 15:04

@PeterMac wrote:Which is why they will NEVER appear in court, under oath !

Oh well, pretty pointless us all being here then - what`s the point.
avatar
Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by Guest on 19.02.13 15:15

@PeterMac wrote:Which is why they will NEVER appear in court, under oath !
***
But they would only be able to avoid that by withdrawing their libel case[s], isn't it?
By which they signal that they've been suing people for no good reasons at all, however, attempted and nearly managed to crush them in the course of things. Bad P.R.
IMO they find themselves between the devil and the deep blue sea.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by Casey5 on 19.02.13 15:27

I think that when Gerry was seen "fiddling" with the shutters, according to Jez that he was actually trying to jemmy them but Jez appearing spoiled things. If he had been able to jemmy the shutter he would still have had to open the window from the outside to make it believable - maybe he thought that he could have - and if he had been able to then what a different outcome there would have been; poor parents, poor Madeleine, wicked abductor.
How the McCanns must hate Jez Wilkins.
We know the story changed later to accommodate the fact that there was no sign of a break in so why did Gerry and Kate ring all those people - I think there were 4 giving media interviews the next day, and tell them the shutters had been jemmied when they knew they hadn't been?
Why not tell them from the start that they had left the patio doors open and then the story needn't have been changed and there would have been one less discrepancy in their tale.

Casey5

Posts : 339
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by bobbin on 19.02.13 15:29

@Woofer wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:Which is why they will NEVER appear in court, under oath !

Oh well, pretty pointless us all being here then - what`s the point.

The 'not appearing under oath' may refer to them 'choosing' never to appear under oath.
If operation grange does its job, they will be obliged to appear.
Even under oath, there is no guarantee that there will be any truth spoken.
Perjury to sociopaths is as normal as having marmalade on your toast for breakfast.

The prison they are living in though is the one of having to suffer each other's intolerable and dislikeable company for the rest of their lives, running, always checking over their shoulders, for where the next arrow in the flesh is going to come from.
They are not enjoying themselves anymore.
It's all about sitting on a time bomb and they know it.
But they made that bomb, and threatened everyone else with it first.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by Mirage on 19.02.13 15:41

@bobbin wrote:
@Woofer wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:Which is why they will NEVER appear in court, under oath !

Oh well, pretty pointless us all being here then - what`s the point.

The 'not appearing under oath' may refer to them 'choosing' never to appear under oath.
If operation grange does its job, they will be obliged to appear.
Even under oath, there is no guarantee that there will be any truth spoken.
Perjury to sociopaths is as normal as having marmalade on your toast for breakfast.

The prison they are living in though is the one of having to suffer each other's intolerable and dislikeable company for the rest of their lives, running, always checking over their shoulders, for where the next arrow in the flesh is going to come from.
They are not enjoying themselves anymore.
It's all about sitting on a time bomb and they know it.
But they made that bomb, and threatened everyone else with it first.

I so agree with that, Bobbin.

In fact, the only comfort to be had if they evade justice is that they have made their own hell.

As Jean-Paul Sartre said in "Huis Clos"(!!!): hell is other people. And never was it more richly deserved than in this particular case.

Mirage

Posts : 1904
Reputation : 757
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by bobbin on 19.02.13 15:42

@Casey5 wrote:I think that when Gerry was seen "fiddling" with the shutters, according to Jez that he was actually trying to jemmy them but Jez appearing spoiled things. If he had been able to jemmy the shutter he would still have had to open the window from the outside to make it believable - maybe he thought that he could have - and if he had been able to then what a different outcome there would have been; poor parents, poor Madeleine, wicked abductor.
How the McCanns must hate Jez Wilkins.
We know the story changed later to accommodate the fact that there was no sign of a break in so why did Gerry and Kate ring all those people - I think there were 4 giving media interviews the next day, and tell them the shutters had been jemmied when they knew they hadn't been?
Why not tell them from the start that they had left the patio doors open and then the story needn't have been changed and there would have been one less discrepancy in their tale.

Casey5, I've been trawling back trying to find reference to Jez remarking that her saw Gerry fiddling with the shutters.
I am certain I read it and that it was discussed, but whether it was on JH, 3 arguidos, MM I can't find it.
Does anyone have a memory of this and where the reference might be.
Could be important, especially as two witnesses at least (Rachel and Fiona) state that the shutters on the patio were down and, as Gerry, first off, had said that he'd entered by the front door, and so had Kate, in the early stages before stories changed.
It shifts the site of operation from the patio at the back towards the car park at the front and will make another lie out of Oldfield's description of the night of 3rd on their own mockumentary / reconstrution, when he clearly recounts how he entered far enough from the patio doors to be able to have a clear line of sight of the two cots, and if only he'd gone that bit further he would have seen Maddie's bed.
It really won't help him to have a prison free existence if he is shown up to have lied on a reconstruction video, publicly viewed many times.
Oh I hope they all think it worth the while.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

Post by pennylane on 19.02.13 15:43

Châtelaine wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:Which is why they will NEVER appear in court, under oath !
***
But they would only be able to avoid that by withdrawing their libel case[s], isn't it?
By which they signal that they've been suing people for no good reasons at all, however, attempted and nearly managed to crush them in the course of things. Bad P.R.
IMO they find themselves between the devil and the deep blue sea.

Yes they are between the devil and the deep blue sea - but a mountain of bad PR would surely be the lesser of two evils, the alternative being a minefield fraught with wholly adverse revelations that they've spent an absolute fortune suppressing.

I think perhaps at the final hurdle they will shamefully use 'the twins well being' angle. The irony will escape them totally.

pennylane

Posts : 2756
Reputation : 1588
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum