The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm 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 your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

The Good Samaritan ?

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by Newintown on 06.09.13 15:34

@PeterMac wrote:You are falling into the trap of trying to make it make sense !big grin 
No doubt the McCanns will come up with an answer to all our queries regarding the "drunk" when they've had enough time to think about it.  Retrofilling I think it's been called by some members on here. 

Maybe Kate will be writing another book while she's in jail entitled "Damn, why did I write that stupid booked called 'madeleine' - if only I hadn't drunk those 6 bottles of NZ wine at the same time".

____________________
Laurie Levenson, Quoted in the Guardian ........

"Never trust an eyewitness whose memory gets better over time"

avatar
Newintown

Posts : 1597
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2011-07-19

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by aiyoyo on 06.09.13 16:15

Record keeping is a way to refer to events/things that one may want to recall later.
So you have to wonder why the Mccanns need to recall those un-important incidences about the drunk, stolen wallet etc...
avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by jeanmonroe on 06.09.13 16:25

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:I don't think that it can be said categorically that the "last photo" was in the camera all along..
Then where was it?
Kate McCann TELLS us she personally took it with HER camera, at 2:29pm, 3rd May 2007, and was so proud of it.

But it's NOT 'in' her camera?

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5815
Reputation : 1657
Join date : 2013-02-07

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by Guest on 06.09.13 16:28

Make that 2007 JM!

If Kate says it was on her camera, I think that we can say with almost 100% certainty that it wasn't!
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by jeanmonroe on 06.09.13 16:29

Newintown wrote:

"Could the "last photo" have been downloaded on to a computer at home in the UK and deleted off the camera then had to be retrieved by Gerry McCann and downloaded back onto the camera when he returned to the UK, to make it look as if the photo had always been on the camera?"
____________________________________________________________________

Now WHY would you want to do THAT?

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5815
Reputation : 1657
Join date : 2013-02-07

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by jeanmonroe on 06.09.13 16:33

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Make that 2007 JM!

If Kate says it was on her camera, I think that we can say with almost 100% certainty that it wasn't!
Oopps!

Maybe the 'last photo' was also 'abducted' and then 'found' by Sherlock Gerry, 21 days LATER.

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5815
Reputation : 1657
Join date : 2013-02-07

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by PeterMac on 06.09.13 18:11

Did anyone write to Easyjet and ask them about the records they have of the incident, or to the Gatwick Ambulance service, or the local hospital.
All would have full records, which will still be there !

____________________

avatar
PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 162
Join date : 2010-12-06

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by Guest on 06.09.13 20:38

@PeterMac wrote:You are falling into the trap of trying to make it make sense !big grin 
Mr M, I think your previous comment applies to your latest one!
 
It would be like trying to trace someone in one of those urban myths. You know the sort of thing: my cousin's boss's daughter's friend gave a life to a hitchhiker who made her feel uneasy so, when they stopped at a petrol station and the guy got out to go to the toilet, she sped off without him. Later she found a blood-stained axe under his seat. My aunt actually fell for that one and she was normally very cynical about everything.
 
They turn out to be a shaggy dog stories but even the dogs wouldn't be able to help if you asked them.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by Monty Heck on 06.09.13 21:34

@T4two wrote:I forced myself to reread the blog entries 1 through 50 and 51 through 100. After several years they are a real eye opener. Amongst others, three things struck me particularly forcibly. The first is that for the twins a real family holiday seems to have begun after Madeleine had disappeared, with visits to the zoo, to some kind of sea world to see the dolphins, to a leisure park, to a resort down the coast, to the beach and visits to 'friends' in the area. The second is the number of days where entries are limited to a description of "a quiet family day" with little or no real content i.e. plenty of time spent doing what? The third thing which stands out like a sore thumb is the almost continual coming and going of family and friends - like one big holiday in fact. In Gm's own words, he could have driven to and from the airport blindfolded he had done the trip so often.
Quite a contrast between pre M's disappearance when the twins' routine was creche/lunch/creche/high tea at creche/quick play/bedtime, and afterwards.  After MW asked them to remove the twins from the creche because of the disruption the contstant stream of family and friends would have been fortunate indeed and perhaps it was their presence which meant the children were released from their robotic existence and indulged in some child friendly activities.  It did at times seem uncannily like an extended vacation for the wider family (appearances on camera aside) so small wonder many locals were perturbed by the goings on that summer.

Aside from the reported "quiet family days", the McCs were largely left alone by the press after the very earliest days; far from being constantly hounded they  reached an agreement to appear in a certain place at at a certain time for photo ops or pre arranged interviews, up until the arguido interrogations.  And with so many friends and family handily available to babysit the children, there would have been a fair bit of free time away from the spotlight, as it were.

Monty Heck

Posts : 470
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-09-09

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by justathought on 06.09.13 23:46

@Monty Heck wrote:
@T4two wrote:I forced myself to reread the blog entries 1 through 50 and 51 through 100. After several years they are a real eye opener. Amongst others, three things struck me particularly forcibly. The first is that for the twins a real family holiday seems to have begun after Madeleine had disappeared, with visits to the zoo, to some kind of sea world to see the dolphins, to a leisure park, to a resort down the coast, to the beach and visits to 'friends' in the area. The second is the number of days where entries are limited to a description of "a quiet family day" with little or no real content i.e. plenty of time spent doing what? The third thing which stands out like a sore thumb is the almost continual coming and going of family and friends - like one big holiday in fact. In Gm's own words, he could have driven to and from the airport blindfolded he had done the trip so often.
Quite a contrast between pre M's disappearance when the twins' routine was creche/lunch/creche/high tea at creche/quick play/bedtime, and afterwards.  After MW asked them to remove the twins from the creche because of the disruption the contstant stream of family and friends would have been fortunate indeed and perhaps it was their presence which meant the children were released from their robotic existence and indulged in some child friendly activities.  It did at times seem uncannily like an extended vacation for the wider family (appearances on camera aside) so small wonder many locals were perturbed by the goings on that summer.

Aside from the reported "quiet family days", the McCs were largely left alone by the press after the very earliest days; far from being constantly hounded they  reached an agreement to appear in a certain place at at a certain time for photo ops or pre arranged interviews, up until the arguido interrogations.  And with so many friends and family handily available to babysit the children, there would have been a fair bit of free time away from the spotlight, as it were.
As I understand matters, there are some when in a time of need, turn to relatives/friends for comfort. There are of course others, whom turn to the reassurance and comfort of being surrounded by those whom are willing to appear to believe them 100%. giving an opportunity to try and blank out of your mind, something you have done very wrong, with those whom all agree with you?

justathought

Posts : 141
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2012-07-06

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by tigger on 07.09.13 6:18

I'm afraid the quiet family days were always on a Saturday, the only day the crèche was closed as it was an 'intake' day. For the rest of the time the twins were in the crèche and mostly family and friends looked after them.

The twins' bedtime appears to have been a trial  - they also threw tantrums - all this is in the diary. Leaking through as it were.
No longer did they go to sleep at 7.30, now why would that be?

I would guess that the happy family photos were taken by invited press photographers. They were very pally with Nick from the Sun for instance. All taken on Saturdays I'd think.

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

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 41
Join date : 2011-07-20

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by Trainer on 07.09.13 8:35

@Nereid wrote:
@Newintown wrote:
@T4two wrote:A comparison of Gerry's blog entry for 20 June 2007 and Kate's diary entry for 20 June 2007. The "We've all been there" incident of the drunken man lying in the street wasn't important enough for a mention in the blog. If the blog was written before the diary, ahem cough was 'discovered', could it be that the drunken man incident was added to the diary as an afterthought? If so - for what purpose? Reading the blogs again and comparing them with the diary and the books throws up a number of such anomalies  or differences in recollection between GM and KM.



Snipped from Gerry's Blog Wednesday 20 June 2007


Arrived back in Praia da Luz this evening and it was great to see Kate and the Kids, even though I was only away for a day and a half.

From Kate's Diary Wednesday 20 June 2007


There is still no sign of Madeleine. I didn't feel like it so I decided not to go running.
Went to pick up Gerry from the airport. It was so good to see him. Just before we reached the apartment we saw a man lying in the middle of the street, so we  Gerry walked him round to his apartment.
stopped the car and got out. It was no surprise to see that he was drunk (we've all been there!) but he recognised Gerry and me immediately.
Could this be the apartment that the McCanns were seen going into.  I know it's mentioned somewhere on the forum that they were seen entering an apartment away from the OC and the "drunk laying in the road" was added as an excuse in case they'd been seen which they obviously were as it's mentioned on here.

The McCann's never do or say anything without a purpose.  Why was it the McCanns who found the "drunk", wouldn't have there been other people around at the time.  Why didn't the McCanns phone the police to come and pick him up and take him home, how do they know (if he existed) that he may have turned violent or be sick all over them.   The fact that "the drunk recognised them" has also been added to dispel anyone questioning the fact that the "drunk" treated them in a gentlemanly manner and didn't shout "f**k off, leave me alone" (in Portugese of course! big grin)
 If the drunk was so drunk as to lie in the middle of the road, he would not have recognised his own mum, let alone the McCanns.
I think the above statements link the "drunk" story . A story invented to "back fill" a possible siting of Gerry entering/leaving an unknown apartment.
avatar
Trainer

Posts : 46
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-01-26
Location : Uk

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by windchime on 07.09.13 8:52

Doctors are trained to keep patient information confidential so why would GM mention on his blog the airplane incident regarding a sick passenger?  Surely he must have known that by doing so it could have been picked up by the press and the sick man and his family bombarded with reporters trying to get a story about Gerry saving his life? Same with the drunk person, as a Dr (or Drs. who were in the papers everyday) you would not mention these things as you are opening up the possibility of the persons identity being found out by millions of people.

Unless of course there was no sick man on the plane and there was no drunk - just made up to divert our minds from what was actually going on.
avatar
windchime

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

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by PeterMac on 07.09.13 10:25

@windchime wrote:
Unless of course there was no sick man on the plane and there was no drunk - just made up to divert our minds from what was actually going on.
Well let us try it.

Kevin, Kevin, calling calling.

THERE WAS NO SICK MAN ON THE PLANE.


Kevin, Your time starts . . . NOW

____________________

avatar
PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 162
Join date : 2010-12-06

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by Guest on 07.09.13 10:36

I can't see where GM's return to UK in June, theft of his wallet or the drunk are mentioned in the book. 

To be fair it might have something to do with a shaggy haired pooch who had a read of it last and he devoured some chapters and left the remainder a little dog eared. Please don't worry, the vet said he's going to be fine and it was well within the bounds of reasonable dogmanship.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by Guest on 07.09.13 10:43

I'm reminded of how Jimmy Savile used to brag about his charity work - it drove my mother mad; she said that "good deeds" (Jimmy's words) should be carried out without trumpeting to the world how marvellous you are for doing them. This was back in the 1960s - oh to have known then what we know now!
 
It surely isn't "normal" for medical professionals to behave the same way - but then nothing about the McCanns is normal.
 
Finn: despite the vet's reassurance, I'm extremely concerned for your dog's welfare!
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by Guest on 07.09.13 11:15

I hope he didn't eat page 129 or the one with the "f*****g t*****s and agree with NFWTD that you should keep an eye on him ...
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by Monty Heck on 07.09.13 13:32

@tigger wrote:I'm afraid the quiet family days were always on a Saturday, the only day the crèche was closed as it was an 'intake' day. For the rest of the time the twins were in the crèche and mostly family and friends looked after them.

The twins' bedtime appears to have been a trial  - they also threw tantrums - all this is in the diary. Leaking through as it were.
No longer did they go to sleep at 7.30, now why would that be?

I would guess that the happy family photos were taken by invited press photographers. They were very pally with Nick from the Sun for instance. All taken on Saturdays I'd think.
Perhaps I have it wrong but understood the McCs were refused access to the creche about mid July  2007, because it was then high season so busier, and the press photographing the drop off/pick up was upsetting other parents.  It was then that Susan Hubbard stepped in as daytime babysitter.  Of course the twins threw the odd tantrum and bedtimes were difficult (it's not called the terrible 2s for nothing!).  Very curious indeed though, that until 3 May they went to sleep at 7.30 each night as if by magic, but thereafter became like most children who generally refuse to settle on demand.

Monty Heck

Posts : 470
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-09-09

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by ryanm on 23.08.15 14:45

Gerry's blog wrote:
Flew in to London to for a series of meetings. Helped a passenger on the flight who collapsed. He was ill enough to require a full assessment on arrival and went off to hospital in an ambulance. 

Unfortunately shortly after arriving in London I had my wallet stolen which meant I was running late. I did manage to get to all my meetings which ran late into the evening. We had very good discussions regarding sustaining the search for Madeleine long term. The role for Kate and I in the campaign will not be nearly be so public. We have to balance any campaigning in the search for Madeleine with protecting Sean and Amelie and making sure their privacy is protected. 
We are exploring the use of new media and using local advertising, particularly in Europe.
 There will of course be event driven media exposure such as the balloon launch on Friday 22nd. There are several other very good ideas being developed and a few large companies are willing to help us.

Kate's Diary wrote:WEDNESDAY, JUNE 20: There is still no sign of Madeleine. I didn't feel like it so I decided not to go running.
Went to pick up Gerry from the airport. It was so good to see him. Just before we reached the apartment we saw a man lying in the middle of the street, so we stopped the car and got out. It was no surprise to see that he was drunk (we've all been there!) but he recognised Gerry and me immediately. Gerry walked him round to his apartment.

As was mentioned previously - interesting how 3 events happened in the one weekend to highlight the couple's selflessness. It's the first mention that I can see regarding over use of the media - it seems they were advised on numerous occasions after this to wind it in. IMO a photo shoot with the twins barely 3 weeks after Madeleine's absence was hard to understand. Their sudden quest for privacy seems to have gotten lost between their other revelations.
avatar
ryanm

Posts : 21
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2015-05-30
Location : dark side of the moon

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by ryanm on 23.08.15 15:03

@T4two wrote:I forced myself to reread the blog entries 1 through 50 and 51 through 100. After several years they are a real eye opener. Amongst others, three things struck me particularly forcibly. The first is that for the twins a real family holiday seems to have begun after Madeleine had disappeared, with visits to the zoo, to some kind of sea world to see the dolphins, to a leisure park, to a resort down the coast, to the beach and visits to 'friends' in the area. The second is the number of days where entries are limited to a description of "a quiet family day" with little or no real content i.e. plenty of time spent doing what? The third thing which stands out like a sore thumb is the almost continual coming and going of family and friends - like one big holiday in fact. In Gm's own words, he could have driven to and from the airport blindfolded he had done the trip so often.

That's very interesting, I did a quick "back of the envelope" tally from his blog and phone records. Of the 11K kilometers racked up in the scenic - 5k were Gerry alone fetching and carrying friends and relations to the airport.
avatar
ryanm

Posts : 21
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2015-05-30
Location : dark side of the moon

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by cbeagle on 25.08.15 15:30

The drunk incident means they admit they were not under 24/7 press surveillance, leads to all sorts of possibilities with the scenic.

cbeagle

Posts : 84
Reputation : 30
Join date : 2014-08-31

Back to top Go down

They've all been there...

Post by missbeetle on 26.08.15 8:10

I wonder if this drunk incident was concocted to explain

being seen in the presence of a shady sort of guy and visiting

his or his associates' apartment nearby?

____________________
'Tis strange, but true; for truth is always strange...
(from Lord Byron's 'Don Juan', 1823)
avatar
missbeetle

Posts : 985
Reputation : 20
Join date : 2014-02-28
Location : New Zealand

Back to top Go down

Re: The Good Samaritan ?

Post by j.rob on 27.08.15 17:19

@Nereid wrote:
@Newintown wrote:
@T4two wrote:A comparison of Gerry's blog entry for 20 June 2007 and Kate's diary entry for 20 June 2007. The "We've all been there" incident of the drunken man lying in the street wasn't important enough for a mention in the blog. If the blog was written before the diary, ahem cough was 'discovered', could it be that the drunken man incident was added to the diary as an afterthought? If so - for what purpose? Reading the blogs again and comparing them with the diary and the books throws up a number of such anomalies  or differences in recollection between GM and KM.



Snipped from Gerry's Blog Wednesday 20 June 2007


Arrived back in Praia da Luz this evening and it was great to see Kate and the Kids, even though I was only away for a day and a half.

From Kate's Diary Wednesday 20 June 2007


There is still no sign of Madeleine. I didn't feel like it so I decided not to go running.
Went to pick up Gerry from the airport. It was so good to see him. Just before we reached the apartment we saw a man lying in the middle of the street, so we  Gerry walked him round to his apartment.
stopped the car and got out. It was no surprise to see that he was drunk (we've all been there!) but he recognised Gerry and me immediately.
Could this be the apartment that the McCanns were seen going into.  I know it's mentioned somewhere on the forum that they were seen entering an apartment away from the OC and the "drunk laying in the road" was added as an excuse in case they'd been seen which they obviously were as it's mentioned on here.

The McCann's never do or say anything without a purpose.  Why was it the McCanns who found the "drunk", wouldn't have there been other people around at the time.  Why didn't the McCanns phone the police to come and pick him up and take him home, how do they know (if he existed) that he may have turned violent or be sick all over them.   The fact that "the drunk recognised them" has also been added to dispel anyone questioning the fact that the "drunk" treated them in a gentlemanly manner and didn't shout "f**k off, leave me alone" (in Portugese of course! big grin)
 If the drunk was so drunk as to lie in the middle of the road, he would not have recognised his own mum, let alone the McCanns.

Agreed. 

This story has to be a cover for Gerry having gone into another nearby apartment (with another man) for some clandestine reason so he has had to invent an innocent explanation in case he was seen/forensics uncover his presence in a nearby apartment.

I wonder who the man was - if indeed he existed. And I wonder which apartment it was that Gerry allegedly walked him back to/went inside?

Wednesday 20th June seems to be quite a 'key' date what with Gerry making his first trip back to the UK. The stolen wallet. The rescue of the man on the plane. The return of the drunk man to his apartment.

What was really going on in and around this time I wonder? 

When did Gerry's disposal of the fridge at the dump blog appear only to be 'whooshed' quickly? Someone somewhere will have a screenshot of that surely? 

Wayback machine   spin?

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 232
Join date : 2014-02-02

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