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!

Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by marconi on 02.08.13 18:16

How often didn't we watch videos, where British specialist`s comments pointed to the PJ's fault: only three months after the disappearance, the PJ turned themselves to the parents.

Citing Jim Gamble, "look first at what is in front of you".

Even the Scotland Yard would have done it different: looked at the parents on the first place.

Journalists even from Australia: the parents first
If that is the most efficient way, what is the Scotland Yard intending to do in Algarve, whilsh Kate, Gerry and Tapas 7 are living in England?

Why don't they teach the PJ and the rest of the world by giving the good example?

If their investigation just started, they have to start with the parents, exactly the way they say that Portugal should have done.

marconi

Posts : 1082
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-05-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by Guest on 02.08.13 18:29

@marconi wrote:How often didn't we watch videos, where British specialist`s comments pointed to the PJ's fault: only three months after the disappearance, the PJ turned themselves to the parents.

Citing Jim Gamble, "look first at what is in front of you".

Even the Scotland Yard would have done it different: looked at the parents on the first place.

Journalists even from Australia: the parents first
If that is the most efficient way, what is the Scotland Yard intending to do in Algarve, whilsh Kate, Gerry and Tapas 7 are living in England?

Why don't they teach the PJ and the rest of the world by giving the good example?

If their investigation just started, they have to start with the parents, exactly the way they say that Portugal should have done.
And be Carter-Rucked for their efforts?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by tigger on 02.08.13 18:57

Just on the off-chance, I'd ask the person who's said in public that she knows what happened because she was there....

Could save a lot of time and money.

____________________
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: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by BerylJ on 02.08.13 19:29

@tigger wrote:Just on the off-chance, I'd ask the person who's said in public that she knows what happened because she was there....

Could save a lot of time and money.

Didn't Kate say what happened was nothing to do with leaving the children alone, or words to that affect? What happened, what ever you mean by the what, what was it to do with then Kate?
avatar
BerylJ

Posts : 56
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-07-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by Guest on 02.08.13 19:42

@BerylJ wrote:
@tigger wrote:Just on the off-chance, I'd ask the person who's said in public that she knows what happened because she was there....

Could save a lot of time and money.

Didn't Kate say what happened was nothing to do with leaving the children alone, or words to that affect? What happened, what ever you mean by the what, what was it to do with then Kate?
***
Quite.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

expenses

Post by marconi on 02.08.13 22:52

After having spent such a huge amount of money in the review, I believe that Cameron, Theresa May and the Met police will not accept stopping the investigation.
They will find a way to take this saga to a solution.
In my opinion, they can interrogate the parents and Tapas 7. It is not a review anymore. And the interrogation can happen in the UK. And make them suspects.
The McCanns can not get away with this crime, for a second time.
Such a high profile case, the Scotland Yard would become ridiculous. If they don't make it, I hope the British media will crash them.
Losing their prestige in front of te world, feeling embarassed and ashamed, defeated by a mediterranean country.
The PJ are showing them their own teeth. Beautiful Portuguese teeth.
I'm impressed that such a rif raf people like the McCanns are can achieve so much!!!!!!

marconi

Posts : 1082
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-05-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by lj on 02.08.13 23:14

@tigger wrote:Just on the off-chance, I'd ask the person who's said in public that she knows what happened because she was there....

Could save a lot of time and money.

Yep, and maybe her friends memory will be jogged all at the sudden.

____________________
"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: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by aiyoyo on 03.08.13 0:42

@BerylJ wrote:
@tigger wrote:Just on the off-chance, I'd ask the person who's said in public that she knows what happened because she was there....

Could save a lot of time and money.

Didn't Kate say what happened was nothing to do with leaving the children alone, or words to that affect? What happened, what ever you mean by the what, what was it to do with then Kate?

She may be telling the truth in those two instances,.
(1) I knew because I was there; and
(2) What happened had nothing to do with leaving the children alone because they were not left alone on the 3rd - that was only a charade - no neglect = no abduction.

My belief is Madeleine met her fate earlier  and the twins were left in another apt . They were used to stage the scene.
avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Reputation : 321
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by tigger on 03.08.13 6:09

@aiyoyo wrote:
@BerylJ wrote:
@tigger wrote:Just on the off-chance, I'd ask the person who's said in public that she knows what happened because she was there....

Could save a lot of time and money.

Didn't Kate say what happened was nothing to do with leaving the children alone, or words to that affect? What happened, what ever you mean by the what, what was it to do with then Kate?

She may be telling the truth in those two instances,.
(1)  I knew because I was there; and
(2) What happened had nothing to do with leaving the children alone because they were not left alone on the 3rd - that was only a charade - no neglect = no abduction.

My belief is Madeleine met her fate earlier  and the twins were left in another apt .  They were used to stage the scene.
Attaboy! thumbup

____________________
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: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by PeterMac on 03.08.13 7:58

@aiyoyo wrote:
She may be telling the truth in those two instances,.
(1)  I knew because I was there; and
(2) What happened had nothing to do with leaving the children alone because they were not left alone on the 3rd - that was only a charade - no neglect = no abduction.
.

We should give her the benefit of the doubt, as agree that she might well have been telling the truth.
In which case a number of things follow logically, as you indicate.

Add Gerry's "The night we found her" and assume that was also the truth, and pick away at other apparent "slips of the tongue" and we can begin to fit it all together.

____________________

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: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by windchime on 03.08.13 10:28

@aiyoyo wrote:
@BerylJ wrote:
@tigger wrote:Just on the off-chance, I'd ask the person who's said in public that she knows what happened because she was there....

Could save a lot of time and money.

Didn't Kate say what happened was nothing to do with leaving the children alone, or words to that affect? What happened, what ever you mean by the what, what was it to do with then Kate?

She may be telling the truth in those two instances,.
(1)  I knew because I was there; and
(2) What happened had nothing to do with leaving the children alone because they were not left alone on the 3rd - that was only a charade - no neglect = no abduction.

My belief is Madeleine met her fate earlier  and the twins were left in another apt .  They were used to stage the scene.
Quite agree to both of these:
(1) she was there crying Maddie, Maddie, Maddie
(2) get everyone involved because non of the Drs could save MBM that night and each of them realised they were complicit in not calling for an ambulance or seeking medical attention for MBM when she needed it - we failed her!!
avatar
windchime

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by Guest on 06.08.13 9:46

@marconi wrote:How often didn't we watch videos, where British specialist`s comments pointed to the PJ's fault: only three months after the disappearance, the PJ turned themselves to the parents.

Citing Jim Gamble, "look first at what is in front of you".

Even the Scotland Yard would have done it different: looked at the parents on the first place.

Journalists even from Australia: the parents first
If that is the most efficient way, what is the Scotland Yard intending to do in Algarve, whilsh Kate, Gerry and Tapas 7 are living in England?

Why don't they teach the PJ and the rest of the world by giving the good example?

If their investigation just started, they have to start with the parents, exactly the way they say that Portugal should have done.

I disagree. 

This isn't a new investigation. They aren't starting from scratch and they are aware of the conclusions of the initial investigation so they are working backwards. 

One of the Mets' known actions was to take a dna test of the girl in New Zealand. The police knew she wasn't Maddie but the dna test has eradicated any doubt. 

Working backwards and eliminating the impossible is slowly tightening the noose round the necks of the guilty parties removing any wriggle room.

This is why I don't think it is a whitewash - a whitewash would have started with the McCanns and eliminated them almost immediately.

The big question is whether there will be enough evidence to bring charges.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by PeterMac on 06.08.13 10:26

Poe wrote:
I disagree. 
This isn't a new investigation. They aren't starting from scratch and they are aware of the conclusions of the initial investigation so they are working backwards. 
One of the Mets' known actions was to take a dna test of the girl in New Zealand. The police knew she wasn't Maddie but the dna test has eradicated any doubt. 
Working backwards and eliminating the impossible is slowly tightening the noose round the necks of the guilty parties removing any wriggle room.
This is why I don't think it is a whitewash - a whitewash would have started with the McCanns and eliminated them almost immediately.
The big question is whether there will be enough evidence to bring charges.
Quite so.
For example
195 leads from the M3 boxes - all of them from psychics and nutters. All ruled out, (as they had been by M3)
38 new leads from the files - nothing more than two outstanding questions for each one which have either been lost in translation, or were never asked, and have to be, before each of those can be eliminated.

And then . . .
Eliminate all other factors, and the one which remains must be the truth.
You know my method. It is founded upon the observation of trifles.
In solving a problem of this sort, the grand thing is to be able to reason backward.
How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?
You see, but you do not observe. The distinction is clear.
We balance probabilities and choose the most likely. It is the scientific use of the imagination.
It is impossible as I state it, and therefore I must in some respect have stated it wrong.
One should always look for a possible alternative, and provide against it. It is the first rule of criminal investigation.

Dogs don't make mistakes.
(Holmes, S.)

____________________

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: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by nomendelta on 06.08.13 11:10

Of course it's a whitewash - any investigating officer with half a brain would realise within 10 minutes that the timeline doesn't make sense. Add to that the dogs detecting blood and cadaverine and you have a pretty solid picture of what probably happened.

Yet we are expected to believe that several million pounds have been spent ruling out other options? We are talking about a couple and their friends who have received unprecedented help from the authorities thus far. What is MORE likely - that millions have been spent creating a whitewash or that millions have been spent ruling out every other scenario?

As Gerry said, you can't prove a negative. The lack of evidence of an abductor mixed with SY's failure to find one would not automatically point to the McCanns, would it?

I sincerely believe that we'll either have the crime pinned on a deceased paedophile with no trace of Maddie's body or else it will drag on so long that it'll need to be closed with some conclusions and those will be decidedly vague.

nomendelta

Posts : 330
Reputation : 41
Join date : 2011-05-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by pennylane on 06.08.13 11:34

@nomendelta wrote:Of course it's a whitewash - any investigating officer with half a brain would realise within 10 minutes that the timeline doesn't make sense. Add to that the dogs detecting blood and cadaverine and you have a pretty solid picture of what probably happened.

Yet we are expected to believe that several million pounds have been spent ruling out other options? We are talking about a couple and their friends who have received unprecedented help from the authorities thus far. What is MORE likely - that millions have been spent creating a whitewash or that millions have been spent ruling out every other scenario?

As Gerry said, you can't prove a negative. The lack of evidence of an abductor mixed with SY's failure to find one would not automatically point to the McCanns, would it?

I sincerely believe that we'll either have the crime pinned on a deceased paedophile with no trace of Maddie's body or else it will drag on so long that it'll need to be closed with some conclusions and those will be decidedly vague.

You are absolutely spot on!



pennylane

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Instead of criticising, why not the good example?

Post by tigger on 06.08.13 12:34

If all else is stripped away and we ignore ANY statement made by former arguidos or anyone closely connected with said arguidos, what do we have?
When we allow only independent evidence:

We have a missing child.
An empty  bed that does not appear to have been slept in at all.
We have  parents who did not search for the child.
We cannot be sure whether any door or window was accessible (no independent witness) for ingress or egress either by a child or the abductor.
We have creche sheets concerning the missing girl which are the only creche sheets with many corrections and doubtful signatures. All other creche sheets are pristine and clear.
We have a record of 14 voicemails to one of the parents on the day preceding the  alleged day of disappearance. These documented calls are denied by the parent.
We cannot be sure about the exact time of disappearance of the child since all testimonies concerning this are by dependent witnesses and only one statement by a possibly independent witness (JW) gives a half-hour window of opportunity.
There is however no independent method to establish either the date or time of disappearance, since the half hour window mentioned above only concerns the location of one of the parents.  
At a later date the CSI  (blood and cadaver) dogs alert to 13 locations  all closely connected to the apartment in which the family stayed and items belonging or used by the parents.
The dogs not alert at any other location  searched.

Additional material:
There are remarkably few holiday photographs of the child or indeed children.
A last photograph is produced some three weeks later.
All photographs released of the child show a great variety of features, age and height and indeed the position of the coloboma.

The parents found it important to produce timelines (two on the evening, one typed out later) within hours of alerting the police.

The father, on being told that publicising the unique mark in the missing girl's eye will almost certainly be her death warrant if she is still alive, states in a later interview that the putative abductor might do something to her eye, but it was a good marketing ploy.  

During a lengthy review of the case - meaning that no practical steps are taken to search for her - which entails a complete re-appraisal of the documentation in the case, the Ltd. Co. set up to search for the child dismisses their private detectives.

____________________
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

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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