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!

Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by aquila on 29.07.13 9:04

@Kepharel,

Is that the 'obnoxious' thread you started without actually using the word 'obnoxious' anywhere in the content and went on to talk about psychopathy and sexual perversion?

You certainly could get a job working for a spin master. You've a real talent for it.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8702
Reputation : 1687
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by Woofer on 29.07.13 9:14

@Newintown wrote:

Why would you even mention this, are you trying to tell us something, or are you trying to draw posters into defaming the McCanns?

You and Kepheral seem to be a double act or are you the same person?

Are you implying there is something wrong in my mentioning `this`?  Its part of the thread - go back and read and perhaps even consider what you would do if you`d accidentally killed your child. Please stop accusing me of being in league with another member or even of being the same person - I am not.
avatar
Woofer

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by russiandoll on 29.07.13 9:39

This thread is very unpleasant reading. It appears that since Kepharel joined the forum he/she has been regarded with suspicion, simply for posting something from left-field or playing devil's advocate.
  If he/she is a WUM then feeding the mischief-making by responding is simply to invite more of it. Best to ignore imo.
 Imo he/she is a stimulating poster who is not a problem for anyone as he/she has been neither libellous of the McCanns nor abusive to other members; in fact considering how his /her speaking personally of grief was responded to, I found him /her very polite.
 We have free speech here so I hope admin step in to put a stop the bullying of a newcomer who is being treated with contempt for doing no more than expressing an opinion.

 The same people are making snide remarks about another poster and accusing that person of being part of a double act. Can admin please step in and sort out the mess before it escalates into something very degrading which will make the forum look not just nasty but ridiculous?
 Thank you.

____________________



             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: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by aquila on 29.07.13 9:44

Kepharel is hardly a newcomer russiandoll. He joined in January 2012.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8702
Reputation : 1687
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by russiandoll on 29.07.13 9:46

Sorry for calling him /her a newcomer. A new poster then? My comments still stand.

____________________



             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: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by aquila on 29.07.13 9:53

@russiandoll wrote:Sorry for calling him /her a newcomer. A new poster then? My comments still stand.

My posts still stand too russiandoll. If you find my posts offensive you can always skip past them if you wish. If controversial threads are started on this forum they are inevitably going to bring comments - that's what they are designed to do.

Still, it's always good to stick up for the integrity of the forum - some of us do it in different ways.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8702
Reputation : 1687
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by Guest on 29.07.13 9:56

@russiandoll wrote:This thread is very unpleasant reading. It appears that since Kepharel joined the forum he/she has been regarded with suspicion, simply for posting something from left-field or playing devil's advocate.
  If he/she is a WUM then feeding the mischief-making by responding is simply to invite more of it. Best to ignore imo.
 Imo he/she is a stimulating poster who is not a problem for anyone as he/she has been neither libellous of the McCanns nor abusive to other members; in fact considering how his /her speaking personally of grief was responded to, I found him /her very polite.
 We have free speech here so I hope admin step in to put a stop the bullying of a newcomer who is being treated with contempt for doing no more than expressing an opinion.

 The same people are making snide remarks about another poster and accusing that person of being part of a double act. Can admin please step in and sort out the mess before it escalates into something very degrading which will make the forum look not just nasty but ridiculous?
 Thank you.

 Quite so RD, if people don't like the posts they should not respond and the post will drop down the page.  Kepharel has neither been rude or disruptive, therefore please if you don't like the posts simply ignore.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by aquila on 29.07.13 9:58

candyfloss wrote:
@russiandoll wrote:This thread is very unpleasant reading. It appears that since Kepharel joined the forum he/she has been regarded with suspicion, simply for posting something from left-field or playing devil's advocate.
  If he/she is a WUM then feeding the mischief-making by responding is simply to invite more of it. Best to ignore imo.
 Imo he/she is a stimulating poster who is not a problem for anyone as he/she has been neither libellous of the McCanns nor abusive to other members; in fact considering how his /her speaking personally of grief was responded to, I found him /her very polite.
 We have free speech here so I hope admin step in to put a stop the bullying of a newcomer who is being treated with contempt for doing no more than expressing an opinion.

 The same people are making snide remarks about another poster and accusing that person of being part of a double act. Can admin please step in and sort out the mess before it escalates into something very degrading which will make the forum look not just nasty but ridiculous?
 Thank you.

 Quite so RD, if people don't like the posts they should not respond and the post will drop down the page.  Kepharel has neither been rude or disruptive, therefore please if you don't like the posts simply ignore.

 Does that mean not challenge Kepharel's posts Candyfloss?
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8702
Reputation : 1687
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by Guest on 29.07.13 10:05

@Kepharel wrote:
 
Amanda Coxon was a cleaning lady for the McCanns, and this is what she has to say about Madeleine:
 
I had a good relationship with Madeleine, I would describe her as full of fun, intelligent for her age and very active. She is a very happy girl and the last time I saw her, she was already capable of maintaining a conversation. She clearly understood the instructions given to her and was a good listener.
 
I would say that Madeleine is a very healthy girl
and I never noticed any changes in behaviour. I would not describe her as a hyperactive child. I do not know of any problem related to sleeping, but I was rarely present when she went to bed.
Kate and Gerry never mentioned having any type of problem with Madeleine.
She was well behaved, never caused her parents any problems and apparently always understood what she was told. The parents never looked tired of taking care of Madeleine.”
 
Hayley Plummer was a nursery school teacher, and someone one who, given daily contact with the little girl, you might expect to notice episodes of emotional trauma over the years.  This what she says:
 
As a couple, James and I would take care of Madeleine and the twins in their house in Rothley about every two months, for a few hours each time. We would arrive at the house at about 19.00 – 19.30 when the twins were already asleep, but Madeleine was waiting for us and would be up for about half an hour. The routine followed would be to brush her teeth and tell her a story or two before going to sleep, followed by a brief passage through the twins room. Once she was alone Madeleine would generally fall asleep after 10 minutes and during my stays in their house she would never get out of bed after having fallen asleep. She would always sleep in her room. I do not remember Madeleine having been difficult when we were there.”
 
And
 
“I have known Madeleine for about three years and she was always under my responsibility at the Laurels nursery… Kate and Gerry would take turns in dropping off and fetching her from the nursery……….Madeline was a very polite and affectionate girl, particularly in respect to the twins. At the nursery she was a very popular girl and it was a pleasure to have her near……… She seemed to be a very alert girl and she always adapted well. The only time I remember her feeling a little intimidated was when she changed classroom for the first time and she was placed with more children who were a bit older…… She would show some shyness when she was left by her parents but she adapted rapidly so that they would leave after she finished her breakfast…….. Madeleine made many friends at the nursery but her best friend was Sophia. I think that Kate and Sophia’s mother (Sally) became good friends based upon the friendship between their daughters…. Madeleine never showed any problems or worry she might have had, or show any behaviour that would cause any worry. I do not consider Madeleine to be hyperactive, she was a healthy girl with normal development for her age……. For me Madeleine is calm and easy to get on with.”
 
Finally, another Nursery teacher, Sharon Lewin
 
I never saw Madeleine have any problem or conflict with her parents, family members or friends……. Madeleine felt comfortable at the nursery school; she had many friends and got on well with the other children…… Madeleine was quite a healthy girl. She had a good appetite and ate well. I don't remember any injury or accident. She would occasionally have a small scrape at the nursery but nothing abnormal. During the six months she was under my care she was absent five times because of being unwell, but they were just small colds with a high temperature…… Madeleine was a very active child but I would not call her hyperactive. She never got over excited and always had good behaviour. Madeleine was easy to look after, a very independent girl but she never placed herself in dangerous situations, as far as I saw….. Occasionally during the afternoon, some of the children would have a siesta in the dormitory but Madeleine never did. I had the opportunity to be present at her bedtime when I looked after her. Bath time was at about 18.30 - 19.00 and she would later go to bed at about 19.30 – 20.00 I would read her a story or two and she would always fall asleep half way through.
 

 Looks like they were all following the same script. Madeleine is healthy, sleeps well and is not hyperactive but they forgot to mention her beauty!

Also, have you noticed that the two nursery teachers refer to Madeleine in both the past and present tense.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by Guest on 29.07.13 10:10

Aquila you know perfectly well it is ok to challenge posts, have debate and opinion.  However, the posts have not been about that, and if Kepheral is here to disrupt then by engaging in accusations etc.,  they are succeeding aren't they?  No disrespect to Kepharel, just making a point.   This thread already has pages of argument, if people had not responded it would have dropped down, now please let the mods and admin do their jobs, and if you don't like posts just ignore them.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by aquila on 29.07.13 10:23

My sincere apologies Candyfloss. I shall try very hard to concentrate only on anything possibly of substance in Kepharel's topics.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8702
Reputation : 1687
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by pennylane on 29.07.13 10:25

@Kepharel wrote:
@plebgate wrote:Snipped from Keph's post
"
Background

Here is a synopsis of the background to the incorporation of Madeleine’s Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned as presented in some detail by Enid O’Dowd.

The company was formed just 11 days after the disappearance of Madeleine through a personal contact of Gerry McCann who flew to Portugal with a Barrister on May 11th for discussions that took place over that week-end.  The fact that it was a company governed by Articles of Association and not a charity is explained by the fact that charities can only be accepted by the Charities Commission if their purposes are of benefit to the general public, which this fund clearly was not. It was intended solely to search for Madeleine McCann so would not have qualified; even so an initial approach was made to the Commission but later withdrawn."


If it had gained charitable status then they would not have been able to make repayments on their mortgage from the Fund.

Here is one of the questions the Port. Police asked Mrs.

41. Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?

Any thoughts on why the police asked that question Keph?





 Hya Plebgate,

The unanswered question put to Kate while she was an arguido might seem a bit of a show-stopper for someone attempting to put a case for this thread.  It certainly wasn't a question dreamt up by the PJ before they came into work that morning, and because she was an arguido the whole tenor of the questions got tougher.  I'm in the dark as to why they asked this loaded question; at one extreme it may have been  because they had knowledge that Kate was unable to cope emotionally and physically, and the matter had maybe come before Social Services, or it may be a confrontational ploy to get her to admit she did once ask members of the family if they could take her on for a short while, say a couple of months, while she tried to stabilise her mental and physical exhaustion.

I would really like to know as well.

If Kate did consider handing over custody of Maddie to a relative, that is huge under any circumstances, but most especially since Maddie mysteriously disappeared, and the blood and cadaver dogs alerted to the McCann's apartment and hire car.   One can only imagine how much effort TM would exert to keep a lid on such lethal information if true, and how keen they would be to know the source and what else was divulged to the Police Judiciary.  

I personally believe we don't know the half of it regarding Kate's mental state at the time.  IVF treatment is a significant source of depression in many new mums, as is giving birth to twins, and it's not unreasonable to suspect depression may have been a contributing factor to what happened to Madeleine on that ill fated holiday.  

In addition, Madeleine's coloboma would have resulted in a serious health assessment and regular vision tests, to ascertain her sight was not deteriorating in the afflicted eye. The Home Office did not forward the requested basic health and background information on the McCanns to the PJ, and this is a massive red flag as to their agenda!   This astonishing lack of cooperation makes me believe damaging information was held back, otherwise why not forward such seemingly mundane data immediately?

pennylane

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by windchime on 29.07.13 11:00

Hi I am new here although I have been reading this forum for a very long time now - finally decided to take the plunge!

Regarding the refusal to pass over the medical records - my question would be WHY would they not? 

It should make no difference what is on her records, the fact is a child had gone missing and no one had any idea where she was, therefore every piece of information requested, however insignificant it may have appeared to be, should have been passed on. 

So who stopped it and what made them stop it??

I also notice that in the quotes from the nursery workers regarding MBM, yes they are mainly in past tense they are quite rehearsed in their wording and one of them mentions that having only been in contact with MBM for 6 months MBM was only absent for 5 times (in 6 months) but this was only due to colds with a high temperature.  5 times in 6 months is a lot of colds and a lot of absence.  She does not say how long each episode of absence was for.  How does she know for sure that this was the reason for the absence, school teachers only have the parents word for the reason of a child's absence.

These 3 people who 'claim' to have known MBM before she disappeared seem to have a strange insight of her sleeping patterns, her capacity to talk and maintain a conversation and are all obviously highly trained in children's health issues as each of the 3 of them can put in a statement that MBM is not a hyperactive child!! 

I have never seen anyone anywhere ever give an account of MBM that makes me feel she was ever a real little girl. Usually there are plenty of people who right at the start with the media activity who want to tell the world how well they knew the child from headmasters - lollypop ladies, shopkeepers - neighbours but here we only ever seem to read highly rehearsed statements from a chosen few.

All very sad and so much confusion. I apologise if these comments have been said time and again but the one thing about this case above all else I find odd is
 the coldness of the 'statements' made by anyone who claims to have known MBM and that includes family and close friends.
avatar
windchime

Posts : 137
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-07-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by aquila on 29.07.13 11:05

@windchime wrote:Hi I am new here although I have been reading this forum for a very long time now - finally decided to take the plunge!

Regarding the refusal to pass over the medical records - my question would be WHY would they not? 

It should make no difference what is on her records, the fact is a child had gone missing and no one had any idea where she was, therefore every piece of information requested, however insignificant it may have appeared to be, should have been passed on. 

So who stopped it and what made them stop it??

I also notice that in the quotes from the nursery workers regarding MBM, yes they are mainly in past tense they are quite rehearsed in their wording and one of them mentions that having only been in contact with MBM for 6 months MBM was only absent for 5 times (in 6 months) but this was only due to colds with a high temperature.  5 times in 6 months is a lot of colds and a lot of absence.  She does not say how long each episode of absence was for.  How does she know for sure that this was the reason for the absence, school teachers only have the parents word for the reason of a child's absence.

These 3 people who 'claim' to have known MBM before she disappeared seem to have a strange insight of her sleeping patterns, her capacity to talk and maintain a conversation and are all obviously highly trained in children's health issues as each of the 3 of them can put in a statement that MBM is not a hyperactive child!! 

I have never seen anyone anywhere ever give an account of MBM that makes me feel she was ever a real little girl. Usually there are plenty of people who right at the start with the media activity who want to tell the world how well they knew the child from headmasters - lollypop ladies, shopkeepers - neighbours but here we only ever seem to read highly rehearsed statements from a chosen few.

All very sad and so much confusion. I apologise if these comments have been said time and again but the one thing about this case above all else I find odd is
 the coldness of the 'statements' made by anyone who claims to have known MBM and that includes family and close friends.

 Hello Windchime,

Your comments are spot on.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8702
Reputation : 1687
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by Guest on 29.07.13 11:13

welcome  windchime, good post.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by Guest on 29.07.13 11:14

welcome from me too Windchime.

I know it's easy to be suspicious of everything about this case but there seem to be few (if any) believable independent statements about Madeleine.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by sallypelt on 29.07.13 11:15

@windchime wrote:Hi I am new here although I have been reading this forum for a very long time now - finally decided to take the plunge!

Regarding the refusal to pass over the medical records - my question would be WHY would they not? 

It should make no difference what is on her records, the fact is a child had gone missing and no one had any idea where she was, therefore every piece of information requested, however insignificant it may have appeared to be, should have been passed on. 

So who stopped it and what made them stop it??

I also notice that in the quotes from the nursery workers regarding MBM, yes they are mainly in past tense they are quite rehearsed in their wording and one of them mentions that having only been in contact with MBM for 6 months MBM was only absent for 5 times (in 6 months) but this was only due to colds with a high temperature.  5 times in 6 months is a lot of colds and a lot of absence.  She does not say how long each episode of absence was for.  How does she know for sure that this was the reason for the absence, school teachers only have the parents word for the reason of a child's absence.

These 3 people who 'claim' to have known MBM before she disappeared seem to have a strange insight of her sleeping patterns, her capacity to talk and maintain a conversation and are all obviously highly trained in children's health issues as each of the 3 of them can put in a statement that MBM is not a hyperactive child!! 

I have never seen anyone anywhere ever give an account of MBM that makes me feel she was ever a real little girl. Usually there are plenty of people who right at the start with the media activity who want to tell the world how well they knew the child from headmasters - lollypop ladies, shopkeepers - neighbours but here we only ever seem to read highly rehearsed statements from a chosen few.

All very sad and so much confusion. I apologise if these comments have been said time and again but the one thing about this case above all else I find odd is
 the coldness of the 'statements' made by anyone who claims to have known MBM and that includes family and close friends.

Windchime, children's issues in law, are extremely complicated It's not a case of asking for records and handing them over. Most on here will know that the McCann's attended a hearing in the Family Court early on (I can't remember the year or date, but I'm sure people on here will know) We don't know what was discussed at that hearing, as these hearings are conducted in camera. I will post a link for you to read, as I have someone breathing down my neck for emergency access to this computer:spin:
http://www.kent.police.uk/about_us/policies/n/n021.html

sallypelt

Posts : 3652
Reputation : 810
Join date : 2012-11-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by lj on 29.07.13 17:10

I stopped reading half way. In my opinion the way Kepharel is being attacked is rather low class: a lot of personal attacks without any substantial backbone.
It is very strange that those talking about free speech all the time forget to tell that it has to be within their personal boundaries.

Kepharel has done some very thorough research, and as far as I have seen posted nothing that cannot be back up with references or quotes from the files. He has done some great work on rogatory interviews. That he points out some aspects that still are not fully explained should not be a reason to attack him, but a motivation to reconsider all theories.

Recently I was attacked because I (still firmly) believe that the SY actions will be one big whitewash. I was asked what I was doing here and it was suggested I would not have Madeleine's interest in mind. If I am right, and it will be a whitewash, wouldn't it be of the utmost importance to be here for Madeleine?

It is sad that that kind of posting makes this forum look more and more like a pro- rant place.

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/
avatar
lj

Posts : 3322
Reputation : 196
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by Casey5 on 29.07.13 17:25

@windchime wrote:Hi I am new here although I have been reading this forum for a very long time now - finally decided to take the plunge!

Regarding the refusal to pass over the medical records - my question would be WHY would they not? 

It should make no difference what is on her records, the fact is a child had gone missing and no one had any idea where she was, therefore every piece of information requested, however insignificant it may have appeared to be, should have been passed on. 

So who stopped it and what made them stop it??





 Hi windchime, I agree with your comments. I have read that the Home Secretary at the time refused to send details of their finances for the period requested by the PJ because she felt that the period was too extensive but would authorise disclosure for a shorter period.

Given that this happened wouldn't you think the McCanns themselves would have forwarded all financial details that they could - going back years if necessary?

Likewise they have said on TV that they hadn't been approached by the PJ for their telephone and mobile records.

Kate and Gerry McCann, if trying to do everything in their power to help the police as they have repeatedly said they were doing, would have asked what records they needed and made sure that they themselves forwarded them to the PJ.

I would have been banging on the doors of the police station every day and asking what help I could give them. I would have answered any question asked and even questions they had not asked just in case anything had been overlooked.

What I wouldn't have done is set up a fund, hire lawyers, and accept a PR person.
And I would have requested help from the Portuguese media and not the British, I've never understood that bit. Madeleine "disappeared" in Portugal not Britain so what would be the point of having 24 hour coverage of the disappearance in Britain? She's never been sighted here has she? Too ruddy cold usually.

Casey5

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by windchime on 29.07.13 18:30

Hello again and thank you for the welcomes!!

It is rather scary making the first steps on here but this topic/thread has had my brain running over the whole thing as if it was just being reported today all over again.

Kepharel made some very thought provoking comments and the one that really struck me was:

'Were they always the way they are now or did what happen to them change them fundamentally from who they once were?'

Kepharel then goes on to quotes from a handful of people who 'claim' to have known MBM.

As I said earlier I have yet to read any quote from anyone who ever talks about MBM that do not appear cold and without empathy.  They tell us nothing about the child and IMO only what it is we are supposed to hear - or what we think GM & KM want us to believe.

It is with this in mind that I cannot believe that MBMs parents were any different before this tragedy than they are now.  They have demonstrated nothing to make me feel sympathy for them; MBM yes, but not them.  Their 'friends' behave in the same cold manner along with anyone who has ever given any  interviews.  I suppose what I am trying to say is each time I see, read or hear anyone talking about MBM I hope and pray that they will give me a little tiny bit of information that I can cling to, something to make MBM feel real, yet every time I am left with a cold feeling and a feeling that each and every person has rehearsed their words over and over again.

I hate to say it but it is almost like a bad play being acted out by an amateur dramatic society - written before the event, poorly chosen actors and very very badly choreographed! 

So Kepheral I think that KM & GM are this way, have always been this way and personally whatever happened to MBM, to cover it up for whatever gain is so wrong it is mind boggling!!
avatar
windchime

Posts : 137
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-07-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by Woofer on 29.07.13 18:41

Windchime - regarding the medical records, I haven`t a clue why the proper records weren`t disclosed to the PJ but I do remember the Mcs got their GP to write a letter saying that M was healthy and had hardly visited the surgery.  I`ve looked for it but cannot find it, but I`m sure someone else will corroborate this.
avatar
Woofer

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by Casey5 on 29.07.13 18:55

windchime, Madeleine is always, but always portrayed as a 2 dimensional figure never as a real little girl, no anecdotes, few stories about what she said or did - a ghost child.
Their family and friends have been coached to trot out the same old lines but of late have been extremely quiet.
The McCanns have always given interviews with pre-prepared questions and the odd time someone has come along and asked something not on plan, Gerry especially is very much affected.
Example, the Jeremy Paxman interview, Paxman makes a remark which has Gerry McCann looking like an evil troll and then he makes a joke of it and says he knows Paxman is playing devil's advocate.
He also through a strop on a foreign TV show and took his mike off and walked off - he'd been asked a question about the case.
And good old Sandra Felgueiras had the temerity to ask him about the dogs. His answer? "Ask the dogs, Sandra".
Generally though they've had an easy media ride so they can go through the questions beforehand, prepare their answers, squeeze a drop of onion juice on a cardi sleeve - if tears are felt to be necessary of course.
I think they have always been the way they are but have managed to show a different face to their family and friends when things are going well and they are not stressed.
When things go wrong though, Kate punches walls, demolishes furniture and Gerry roars like a bull and manipulates people. Oh, and they both lie.

Casey5

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by Juulcy on 29.07.13 19:31

@Woofer wrote:Windchime - regarding the medical records, I haven`t a clue why the proper records weren`t disclosed to the PJ but I do remember the Mcs got their GP to write a letter saying that M was healthy and had hardly visited the surgery.  I`ve looked for it but cannot find it, but I`m sure someone else will corroborate this.

 I would be interested in corroboration. I have never read anything like that. I do know that G Amaral states in his book that his investigation had asked several times for Medical records but that they never came. On exposingthemyth it is claimed that Amaral is lying, but no proof for that statement is given.
avatar
Juulcy

Posts : 161
Reputation : 28
Join date : 2011-07-04
Location : Netherlands

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by Seek truth on 29.07.13 19:32

@Kepharel wrote:
@Seek truth wrote:But why are they always laughing and acting like she's not dead?

Even if they accidentally killed her they'd still feel guilty, they wouldn't react this way. Besides, if one parent took the blame the other could keep the twins.

 Come on do they look like they've lost a lovely little girl?
And what about all the cover up?

They're behaviour shows they're not grieving parents, not one or the other. It's like she either died long time before they announced it (because they've gotten over it) or she's still alive. 

So where is she!!!

 Hi seektruth,

I'm afraid that anything I say in answer to this question may get misinterpreted and torn to shreds by some on here, if you have read previous posts on this thread you will understand.  Here are some resources on the web which deal with grief and how it manifests itself.

http://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/coping/why-some-people-dont-grieve.htm

http://www.griefhealing.com/column-different-grief-patterns.htm...see item 'instrumental mourners' on this site.
You might want to look up Kubler Ross and see her 5 stages of grief, particularly the 'denial' one.
I also found the 'traditional' stages of grief explained on the TC hospice website of help, particularly under the headings of Shock and Numbness and Difficulty concentrating.
There are also articles out there dealing with other 'inappropriate manifestations' such as laughing during grief, at funerals etc.

Remember to read these articles look at grief in a context of how it would manifest itself under normal circumstances, while keeping in mind the totally abnormal circumstances and the furore during 3rd/4th May and later.

 Obviously some people have different ways of expressing grief. BUT not every time!
And not both of them together, and also their tapas friends!

So it looks like, they ALL have difficulty expressing grief. And the media and all are very dumb too.

 Look simple let me show them;

BOO HOO HOO, sad1 

Or

Write it down if you're camara shy.

Seek truth

Posts : 447
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Post by aquila on 29.07.13 19:39

@windchime wrote:Hi I am new here although I have been reading this forum for a very long time now - finally decided to take the plunge!

Regarding the refusal to pass over the medical records - my question would be WHY would they not? 

It should make no difference what is on her records, the fact is a child had gone missing and no one had any idea where she was, therefore every piece of information requested, however insignificant it may have appeared to be, should have been passed on. 

So who stopped it and what made them stop it??

I also notice that in the quotes from the nursery workers regarding MBM, yes they are mainly in past tense they are quite rehearsed in their wording and one of them mentions that having only been in contact with MBM for 6 months MBM was only absent for 5 times (in 6 months) but this was only due to colds with a high temperature.  5 times in 6 months is a lot of colds and a lot of absence.  She does not say how long each episode of absence was for.  How does she know for sure that this was the reason for the absence, school teachers only have the parents word for the reason of a child's absence.

These 3 people who 'claim' to have known MBM before she disappeared seem to have a strange insight of her sleeping patterns, her capacity to talk and maintain a conversation and are all obviously highly trained in children's health issues as each of the 3 of them can put in a statement that MBM is not a hyperactive child!! 

I have never seen anyone anywhere ever give an account of MBM that makes me feel she was ever a real little girl. Usually there are plenty of people who right at the start with the media activity who want to tell the world how well they knew the child from headmasters - lollypop ladies, shopkeepers - neighbours but here we only ever seem to read highly rehearsed statements from a chosen few.

All very sad and so much confusion. I apologise if these comments have been said time and again but the one thing about this case above all else I find odd is
 the coldness of the 'statements' made by anyone who claims to have known MBM and that includes family and close friends.

Hi windchime,

This link to another topic on the forum might help. It includes statements from Drs Philip Hussey and Ian Richard Scofield both Madeleine's GPs. You will find their statements on page 4 of the topic.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t5043p30-munchausens-syndrome-by-proxy?highlight=munchausen+syndrome+by+proxy
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8702
Reputation : 1687
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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