Re: CRIMEWATCH RECONSTRUCTION - However, Kate and Gerry have banned the re-enactment of their daughter’s disappearance from taking place in Portugal through fear of angering the country’s police.

by bobbin 08.10.13 8:36

loopzdaloop wrote:
Ribisl wrote:
Hobs wrote:Since there were so many doctors present why did they not do cpr or treat whatever injuries and call 911 if it had been an accident?

The reason being awkward questions would be asked for one and secondly if she died it was vital an autopsy not be performed.

When a parent acts to prevent an autpsy or hides the body of their dead child, they have a reason to. Guilty knowledge.

What was so bad that the parents in particular and the group as a whole were prepared to face neglect charges resulting in a max 10 stretch rather than admit the truth?
Going off topic, sorry, but I am with you on this Hobbs. I've always believed that the key to understanding this case is to discover why they wouldn't allow an autopsy to be performed on Madeleine. Was it to hide

1. the evidence of medication that might have led to her demise?
2. the evidence of some physical abuse that might have directly or indirectly caused her death?
3. the evidence of sexual abuse?

I don't think they would have gone this length to cover up her death if the only uncomfortable truth that might emerge was her real paternity, for example.
4. Drugs.

They had a sleep behaviour reward chart on their fridge. The problem with behaviour modification systems is that they require effort and consistency over time and would certainly of not allowed abandonment and drinking time opposite adjàcent. Medical Doctors like to treat Symptoms and not the causes, so if the symptom is her waking up the treatment would be drugging to make her sleep. it was Kate's speciality, they got laxidasical, she woke up, climbed on sofa, slipped and cracked her head open. If the body was found the mccanns would be double or triples screwed as neglect resulting in accident AND unethical drugging would certainly result in loss of twins and their jobs and time in prison. They were between a rock and a hard place, yet morally bankrupt so we know what they chose.

I agree with the three simple options above but think there is possibly a more complex option too.
WHY the sleep disturbance in the first place? This would normally signify some underlying insecurity, fear, apprehension, need for finding some comfort, confirmation, solace.
I cannot dismiss the Payne and Gerry (Father of Madeleine) sexual innuendos reported by Mrs. (Dr.) Gaspar.
I cannot dismiss the most disturbing photos of Maddie with blue makeup and the photo-shopped hand with ice-cream.
I cannot dismiss the descriptive piece on the promotional video where Kate and Gerry were filmed, talking about the Full English, loading the boot of the car before the sniffer dogs arrived, made by Jon Corner....it opens with a verbal description of Maddie, announcing that she is dressed as a grown up with makeup, a bow in her hair and gold necklace.
I cannot dismiss why the McCs started squawking about Paedophiles having taken Maddie, at the first moment possible.
I cannot dismiss Sofia Leal's comment about the McCs mixing with friends with such leanings.
In terms of WHY has there been such a 'not very subtle', constant, and underlying reference to paedophilia, to me it is evident that it is intended to keep people, at risk of their own exposure, 'in position', enabling a backing off from proper investigation, covering up to avoid discovery, support and secret/ closed door/back door manoeuvering between politicians, police etc. to manipulate the scene and its evolving inconsistencies.
Mitchell, along with govt./media control, etc. is the pasty fall guy who thought himself so competent at smoothing it all over. But he was born an unconvincing buffoon and remains the same to this very day.
But WE have not let it lie there, nor have thousands of others. I do not think it was a simple accident. I think it happened under 'other' circumstances. THIS is why Goncalo Amaral is being vexatiously libelled, this is why Tony Bennett was hounded and tricked, this is why we are still here, unable to believe that the Scotland Yard investigation will be anything other than another ATTEMPT at a whitewash.
I say 'attempt', since we are here for the long term, and will bat, whatever shite the 'concealers' may try to aim at stopping the discovery of the truth, back at them, until the truth is known.

by Woofer 08.10.13 9:02

Cherry Blossom wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Letter to BBC Crimewatch Unit. No idea who penned it.
Whoever penned it deserves a standing ovation

Agreed - absolutely brilliant. Hope it makes the producers and Andy Redwood think twice about broadcasting drivel. Those with access to twitter, please tweet this letter far and wide.

by flaxyard 08.10.13 9:09

Another fantastic piece. The open letter referred to above is by Petermac. This and his are why we are all here. The drivel factory however has moved into turbo mode - pre Crimewatch. Beware and stand tall.

by nobodythereeither 08.10.13 9:57

bobbin wrote:
loopzdaloop wrote:
Ribisl wrote:
Hobs wrote:Since there were so many doctors present why did they not do cpr or treat whatever injuries and call 911 if it had been an accident?

The reason being awkward questions would be asked for one and secondly if she died it was vital an autopsy not be performed.

When a parent acts to prevent an autpsy or hides the body of their dead child, they have a reason to. Guilty knowledge.

What was so bad that the parents in particular and the group as a whole were prepared to face neglect charges resulting in a max 10 stretch rather than admit the truth?
Going off topic, sorry, but I am with you on this Hobbs. I've always believed that the key to understanding this case is to discover why they wouldn't allow an autopsy to be performed on Madeleine. Was it to hide

1. the evidence of medication that might have led to her demise?
2. the evidence of some physical abuse that might have directly or indirectly caused her death?
3. the evidence of sexual abuse?

I don't think they would have gone this length to cover up her death if the only uncomfortable truth that might emerge was her real paternity, for example.
4. Drugs.

They had a sleep behaviour reward chart on their fridge. The problem with behaviour modification systems is that they require effort and consistency over time and would certainly of not allowed abandonment and drinking time opposite adjàcent. Medical Doctors like to treat Symptoms and not the causes, so if the symptom is her waking up the treatment would be drugging to make her sleep. it was Kate's speciality, they got laxidasical, she woke up, climbed on sofa, slipped and cracked her head open. If the body was found the mccanns would be double or triples screwed as neglect resulting in accident AND unethical drugging would certainly result in loss of twins and their jobs and time in prison. They were between a rock and a hard place, yet morally bankrupt so we know what they chose.
I agree with the three simple options above but think there is possibly a more complex option too.
WHY the sleep disturbance in the first place? This would normally signify some underlying insecurity, fear, apprehension, need for finding some comfort, confirmation, solace.
I cannot dismiss the Payne and Gerry (Father of Madeleine) sexual innuendos reported by Mrs. (Dr.) Gaspar.
I cannot dismiss the most disturbing photos of Maddie with blue makeup and the photo-shopped hand with ice-cream.
I cannot dismiss the descriptive piece on the promotional video where Kate and Gerry were filmed, talking about the Full English, loading the boot of the car before the sniffer dogs arrived, made by Jon Corner....it opens with a verbal description of Maddie, announcing that she is dressed as a grown up with makeup, a bow in her hair and gold necklace.
I cannot dismiss why the McCs started squawking about Paedophiles having taken Maddie, at the first moment possible.
I cannot dismiss Sofia Leal's comment about the McCs mixing with friends with such leanings.
In terms of WHY has there been such a 'not very subtle', constant, and underlying reference to paedophilia, to me it is evident that it is intended to keep people, at risk of their own exposure, 'in position', enabling a backing off from proper investigation, covering up to avoid discovery, support and secret/ closed door/back door manoeuvering between politicians, police etc. to manipulate the scene and its evolving inconsistencies.
Mitchell, along with govt./media control, etc. is the pasty fall guy who thought himself so competent at smoothing it all over. But he was born an unconvincing buffoon and remains the same to this very day.
But WE have not let it lie there, nor have thousands of others. I do not think it was a simple accident. I think it happened under 'other' circumstances. THIS is why Goncalo Amaral is being vexatiously libelled, this is why Tony Bennett was hounded and tricked, this is why we are still here, unable to believe that the Scotland Yard investigation will be anything other than another ATTEMPT at a whitewash.
I say 'attempt', since we are here for the long term, and will bat, whatever shite the 'concealers' may try to aim at stopping the discovery of the truth, back at them, until the truth is known.

Good post, Bobbin.

These things too make me very, very uneasy - particularly the photos you refer to.

They would explain a great deal about the great lengths which have been gone to to - apparently - cover up the actual circumstances of Madeleine's "disappearance", and also - apparently - to "persuade" people not to talk about what they know.

by cass7 08.10.13 10:13

wonder in the crimewatch fairy tale - they will include kates words --THEY HAVE TAKEN HER whos her - 2 little girls in the appartment yet everyone knew kate was on about madeleine

by dentdelion 08.10.13 12:00

"They have taken her". Why would one use plural word 'they' in this context? It sounds so odd, surely "Maddie is missing/gone, someone must have taken her". Rather an overreaction to assume abduction when she might just have wandered out by herself but worse to assume a multiple of abductors! A conspiracy no less!

by Cristobell 08.10.13 12:16

dentdelion wrote:"They have taken her". Why would one use plural word 'they' in this context? It sounds so odd, surely "Maddie is missing/gone, someone must have taken her". Rather an overreaction to assume abduction when she might just have wandered out by herself but worse to assume a multiple of abductors! A conspiracy no less!

Didn't she say those 'f***ing b*****ds' have taken her? Unfortunately I can't remember where I read that, but am sure I did. Charmless as it is, ffing b's is even more specific than 'they', and implies she knew who took her.

by jozi 08.10.13 12:27

bobbin wrote:
loopzdaloop wrote:
Ribisl wrote:
Hobs wrote:Since there were so many doctors present why did they not do cpr or treat whatever injuries and call 911 if it had been an accident?

The reason being awkward questions would be asked for one and secondly if she died it was vital an autopsy not be performed.

When a parent acts to prevent an autpsy or hides the body of their dead child, they have a reason to. Guilty knowledge.

What was so bad that the parents in particular and the group as a whole were prepared to face neglect charges resulting in a max 10 stretch rather than admit the truth?
Going off topic, sorry, but I am with you on this Hobbs. I've always believed that the key to understanding this case is to discover why they wouldn't allow an autopsy to be performed on Madeleine. Was it to hide

1. the evidence of medication that might have led to her demise?
2. the evidence of some physical abuse that might have directly or indirectly caused her death?
3. the evidence of sexual abuse?

I don't think they would have gone this length to cover up her death if the only uncomfortable truth that might emerge was her real paternity, for example.
4. Drugs.

They had a sleep behaviour reward chart on their fridge. The problem with behaviour modification systems is that they require effort and consistency over time and would certainly of not allowed abandonment and drinking time opposite adjàcent. Medical Doctors like to treat Symptoms and not the causes, so if the symptom is her waking up the treatment would be drugging to make her sleep. it was Kate's speciality, they got laxidasical, she woke up, climbed on sofa, slipped and cracked her head open. If the body was found the mccanns would be double or triples screwed as neglect resulting in accident AND unethical drugging would certainly result in loss of twins and their jobs and time in prison. They were between a rock and a hard place, yet morally bankrupt so we know what they chose.
I agree with the three simple options above but think there is possibly a more complex option too.
WHY the sleep disturbance in the first place? This would normally signify some underlying insecurity, fear, apprehension, need for finding some comfort, confirmation, solace.
I cannot dismiss the Payne and Gerry (Father of Madeleine) sexual innuendos reported by Mrs. (Dr.) Gaspar.
I cannot dismiss the most disturbing photos of Maddie with blue makeup and the photo-shopped hand with ice-cream.
I cannot dismiss the descriptive piece on the promotional video where Kate and Gerry were filmed, talking about the Full English, loading the boot of the car before the sniffer dogs arrived, made by Jon Corner....it opens with a verbal description of Maddie, announcing that she is dressed as a grown up with makeup, a bow in her hair and gold necklace.
I cannot dismiss why the McCs started squawking about Paedophiles having taken Maddie, at the first moment possible.
I cannot dismiss Sofia Leal's comment about the McCs mixing with friends with such leanings.
In terms of WHY has there been such a 'not very subtle', constant, and underlying reference to paedophilia, to me it is evident that it is intended to keep people, at risk of their own exposure, 'in position', enabling a backing off from proper investigation, covering up to avoid discovery, support and secret/ closed door/back door manoeuvering between politicians, police etc. to manipulate the scene and its evolving inconsistencies.
Mitchell, along with govt./media control, etc. is the pasty fall guy who thought himself so competent at smoothing it all over. But he was born an unconvincing buffoon and remains the same to this very day.
But WE have not let it lie there, nor have thousands of others. I do not think it was a simple accident. I think it happened under 'other' circumstances. THIS is why Goncalo Amaral is being vexatiously libelled, this is why Tony Bennett was hounded and tricked, this is why we are still here, unable to believe that the Scotland Yard investigation will be anything other than another ATTEMPT at a whitewash.
I say 'attempt', since we are here for the long term, and will bat, whatever shite the 'concealers' may try to aim at stopping the discovery of the truth, back at them, until the truth is known.

A very good post bobbin and I agree with you that it is not a simple accident, they have gone to too many lengths to cover this up for it to be a simple accident ?
Never would I believe that SY would try to do a hatchet job.....but I think so now !!!

I suppose only time will tell but the forthcoming McCrimewatch program tells me all I need to know.

by **Tony Bennett** 08.10.13 12:57

Cristobell wrote:
dentdelion wrote:"They have taken her". Why would one use plural word 'they' in this context? It sounds so odd, surely "Maddie is missing/gone, someone must have taken her". Rather an overreaction to assume abduction when she might just have wandered out by herself but worse to assume a multiple of abductors! A conspiracy no less!
Didn't she say those 'f***ing b*****ds' have taken her? Unfortunately I can't remember where I read that, but am sure I did. Charmless as it is, ffing b's is even more specific than 'they', and implies she knew who took her.

No, I don't think Kate McCann ever used the f___ b___ words - but back to dentdelion's post: CAUTION - this evidence comes from Charlotte Pennington:

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

by Shrike 08.10.13 12:59

Ribisl wrote:
loopzdaloop wrote:
Ribisl wrote:
Hobs wrote:Since there were so many doctors present why did they not do cpr or treat whatever injuries and call 911 if it had been an accident?

The reason being awkward questions would be asked for one and secondly if she died it was vital an autopsy not be performed.

When a parent acts to prevent an autpsy or hides the body of their dead child, they have a reason to. Guilty knowledge.

What was so bad that the parents in particular and the group as a whole were prepared to face neglect charges resulting in a max 10 stretch rather than admit the truth?
Going off topic, sorry, but I am with you on this Hobbs. I've always believed that the key to understanding this case is to discover why they wouldn't allow an autopsy to be performed on Madeleine. Was it to hide

1. the evidence of medication that might have led to her demise?
2. the evidence of some physical abuse that might have directly or indirectly caused her death?
3. the evidence of sexual abuse?

I don't think they would have gone this length to cover up her death if the only uncomfortable truth that might emerge was her real paternity, for example.
4. Drugs.

They had a sleep behaviour reward chart on their fridge. The problem with behaviour modification systems is that they require effort and consistency over time and would certainly of not allowed abandonment and drinking time opposite adjàcent. Medical Doctors like to treat Symptoms and not the causes, so if the symptom is her waking up the treatment would be drugging to make her sleep. it was Kate's speciality, they got laxidasical, she woke up, climbed on sofa, slipped and cracked her head open. If the body was found the mccanns would be double or triples screwed as neglect resulting in accident AND unethical drugging would certainly result in loss of twins and their jobs and time in prison. They were between a rock and a hard place, yet morally bankrupt so we know what they chose.
1 <= 4
Very well put. If the death was caused as a result of her ingesting some form of medication (drugs), it seems unlikely that she died in her bed since there was no trace of cadaverine there.

Just catching up so sorry if something similar is mentioned later on this subject:
If you check the BBC Breakfast interview from 2008 Part 1 at 2:35 Kate deflects the question relating to their negligence to a statement saying that no matter what they did it is wrong for a person to "go into your apartment and take your child from your bed". Surely, this should have been her bed? I'm thinking about how I would say a similar thing and my sub-conscience would always link my son's bed to him and hence I would say it as such.

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

As Ribisl states above, no cadaverine was found in MBM's bed but it was found in the parents' room (not sure about the bed). Not sure if this is anything significant but it is an interesting point. Seems she might never of been in her room the night when whatever happened happened, which also explains her made-up bed.

Tell me if I'm talking rubbish as I'm still coming to terms with all the information in this case :)

by jeanmonroe 08.10.13 13:32

Not sure if this is anything significant but it is an interesting point. Seems she might never of been in her room the night when whatever happened happened, which also explains her made-up bed.

Tell me if I'm talking rubbish as I'm still coming to terms with all the information in this case :)
______________________________________________________________________

You're talking rubbish laughat

Kate McCann knew she had been taken as she SAW an imprint of Madeleine on the mattress!

Now, how she saw THAT without pulling the covers down is anybodys guess!

Because when the PJ got there the covers were pulled up and just the corner turned down!

Perhaps she was wearing the McCann X-ray specs that allow you to see through solid brick apartment walls to keep an eye on your kids, from a distance of 75 metres..

Also useful for looking through bed covers to see imprint of where your 'missing' child was!

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

Oh, and Cuddles was on a high ledge, at adult height, although there isn't one!

by loopzdaloop 08.10.13 13:44

Ribisl wrote:
loopzdaloop wrote:
Ribisl wrote:
Hobs wrote:Since there were so many doctors present why did they not do cpr or treat whatever injuries and call 911 if it had been an accident?

The reason being awkward questions would be asked for one and secondly if she died it was vital an autopsy not be performed.

When a parent acts to prevent an autpsy or hides the body of their dead child, they have a reason to. Guilty knowledge.

What was so bad that the parents in particular and the group as a whole were prepared to face neglect charges resulting in a max 10 stretch rather than admit the truth?
Going off topic, sorry, but I am with you on this Hobbs. I've always believed that the key to understanding this case is to discover why they wouldn't allow an autopsy to be performed on Madeleine. Was it to hide

1. the evidence of medication that might have led to her demise?
2. the evidence of some physical abuse that might have directly or indirectly caused her death?
3. the evidence of sexual abuse?

I don't think they would have gone this length to cover up her death if the only uncomfortable truth that might emerge was her real paternity, for example.
4. Drugs.

They had a sleep behaviour reward chart on their fridge. The problem with behaviour modification systems is that they require effort and consistency over time and would certainly of not allowed abandonment and drinking time opposite adjàcent. Medical Doctors like to treat Symptoms and not the causes, so if the symptom is her waking up the treatment would be drugging to make her sleep. it was Kate's speciality, they got laxidasical, she woke up, climbed on sofa, slipped and cracked her head open. If the body was found the mccanns would be double or triples screwed as neglect resulting in accident AND unethical drugging would certainly result in loss of twins and their jobs and time in prison. They were between a rock and a hard place, yet morally bankrupt so we know what they chose.
1 <= 4
Very well put. If the death was caused as a result of her ingesting some form of medication (drugs), it seems unlikely that she died in her bed since there was no trace of cadaverine there.

for some reason I did not read number 1 properly! yes 1 = 4.

by russiandoll 08.10.13 13:45

quote " and Cuddles was on a high ledge, at adult height, although there isn't one! "

Who is playing the role of Cuddlecat in the reconstruction?

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

by Ribisl 08.10.13 13:45

Shrike wrote:As Ribisl states above, no cadaverine was found in MBM's bed but it was found in the parents' room (not sure about the bed). Not sure if this is anything significant but it is an interesting point. Seems she might never of been in her room the night when whatever happened happened, which also explains her made-up bed.

Madeleine did not die in her parents' bed or was her body ever placed there. The only area alerted by Eddie, the cadaver dog, in their bedroom was inside the wardrobe, from where the blue tennis bag (not big enough to hide a tennis racquet in, according to DP) had mysteriously vanished.

by russiandoll 08.10.13 13:52

It takes time for the development of cadaverine , so Maddie might have died there but been moved very soon afterwards ?

I do not believe that this is what happened , however.

by sallypelt 08.10.13 13:58

Message sent.

by Ribisl 08.10.13 14:05

russiandoll wrote:It takes time for the development of cadaverine , so Maddie might have died there but been moved very soon afterwards ?

I do not believe that this is what happened , however.

Highly unlikely for her to have died in their bed without leaving any trace of cadaverine or blood, given the existence of blood elsewhere in the apartment. It makes more sense for the McCanns to have placed her body there in the aftermath before it was eventually 'taken', but again how can one explain the lack of any detectable scent?

by sallypelt 08.10.13 14:09

Ribisl wrote:
russiandoll wrote:It takes time for the development of cadaverine , so Maddie might have died there but been moved very soon afterwards ?

I do not believe that this is what happened , however.
Highly unlikely for her to have died in their bed without leaving any trace of cadaverine or blood, given the existence of blood elsewhere in the apartment. It makes more sense for the McCanns to have placed her body there in the aftermath before it was eventually 'taken', but again how can one explain the lack of any detectable scent?

As I've stated on more than one occasion, I think that MM was PUT BACK into the apartment, after she had died somewhere else. I have my reasons to think this, but I want to stress, these are only MY opinions. I still think the right people were made arguidos

by Shrike 08.10.13 14:11

Ribisl wrote:
Shrike wrote:As Ribisl states above, no cadaverine was found in MBM's bed but it was found in the parents' room (not sure about the bed). Not sure if this is anything significant but it is an interesting point. Seems she might never of been in her room the night when whatever happened happened, which also explains her made-up bed.
Madeleine did not die in her parents' bed or was her body ever placed there. The only area alerted by Eddie, the cadaver dog, in their bedroom was inside the wardrobe, from where the blue tennis bag (not big enough to hide a tennis racquet in, according to DP) had mysteriously vanished.

Thanks Ribisl for the clarifications.
I think my point here is why would Kate use the term "your bed" from which Madeleine was taken? Surely she would have said "her" bed - I'm just trying to put those words into a possible scenario. As nothing was found by the dogs in the children's room maybe there was something significant about the parents' bed. Just my thoughts on this as I find that statement from Kate another sub-conscious slip of the type we have seen with so many other things this couple have said. Time to move on I think......

by sallypelt 08.10.13 14:20

Shrike wrote:
Ribisl wrote:
Shrike wrote:As Ribisl states above, no cadaverine was found in MBM's bed but it was found in the parents' room (not sure about the bed). Not sure if this is anything significant but it is an interesting point. Seems she might never of been in her room the night when whatever happened happened, which also explains her made-up bed.
Madeleine did not die in her parents' bed or was her body ever placed there. The only area alerted by Eddie, the cadaver dog, in their bedroom was inside the wardrobe, from where the blue tennis bag (not big enough to hide a tennis racquet in, according to DP) had mysteriously vanished.
Thanks Ribisl for the clarifications.
I think my point here is why would Kate use the term "your bed" from which Madeleine was taken? Surely she would have said "her" bed - I'm just trying to put those words into a possible scenario. As nothing was found by the dogs in the children's room maybe there was something significant about the parents' bed. Just my thoughts on this as I find that statement from Kate another sub-conscious slip of the type we have seen with so many other things this couple have said. Time to move on I think......

What do we know for sure from that night? Gerry McCann spoke to JW at around 9.10. I don't think that is in dispute. Can we be sure that the McCann's went to the Tapas bar at the time they said they did, about 8:00 PM or there about? So, if we say that the McCann's left to go to the Tapas bar, when they said they did, and no one had checked on the children, until around the time he spoke to JW, then that would have been around one hour. So, if Maddie had had some kind of accident as soon as her parents left, and wasn't discovered until 9:10, would this have been long enough to produce the smell of death?

by russiandoll 08.10.13 14:20

The only way that one of the beds in the parents' room could have been involved would be if M was placed there very soon after she was found and removed very soon afterwards to another location ?

This case is becoming so distasteful with the propaganda in the media that I do not want to dwell on what I believe happened to Maddie.

I just hope that the little one gets some dignity and respect from someone with the spine and authority to put an end to the disgusting circus this case has become.

by Shrike 08.10.13 14:50

This case is becoming so distasteful with the propaganda in the media that I do not want to dwell on what I believe happened to Maddie.

I just hope that the little one gets some dignity and respect from someone with the spine and authority to put an end to the disgusting circus this case has become.

I can't agree more Russiandoll.

I find it very disturbing and, like you, do not want to dwell on my beliefs.

The whole thing has become a disgrace - for the sake of humanity and the memory of Madeleine I hope there are persons who will stand up and be strong enough to make a difference.

by lj 08.10.13 14:55

ultimaThule wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:WHY did the BBC go to Spain to film a 'reconstruction' if it wasn't the real location in PDL?

Why didn't they film it in the UK?

Another two week 'jolly' for the crew, in sunny Spain, all on BBC ex's?

No 'cost cutting' there for the Beeb!

Wonder if Pattern and Hall went too, only to oversee things, you understand.

If they needed real live palm trees to make the set look authentic, the K&G show could have filmed in Torquay - but maybe Fawlty Towers was fully booked?

If Basil and Sybil can be persuaded to allow K&G to check in for a weekend break the resulting episode can be titled 'Don't Mention The Dogs'

God, I would so watch that one!!

by jeanmonroe 08.10.13 15:01

russiandoll wrote:quote " and Cuddles was on a high ledge, at adult height, although there isn't one! "

Who is playing the role of Cuddlecat in the reconstruction?

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

Sir Edmund 'Cuddlecat' Hillary.

Head for heights!

by ShuBob 08.10.13 15:14

russiandoll wrote:The only way that one of the beds in the parents' room could have been involved would be if M was placed there very soon after she was found and removed very soon afterwards to another location ?

This case is becoming so distasteful with the propaganda in the media that I do not want to dwell on what I believe happened to Maddie.

I just hope that the little one gets some dignity and respect from someone with the spine and authority to put an end to the disgusting circus this case has become.

Hear, hear!

I stopped discussing possible theories a very long time ago. I tend to stick to the known facts. These are distressing enough sad

by Praiaaa 08.10.13 15:33

jeanmonroe wrote:
russiandoll wrote:quote " and Cuddles was on a high ledge, at adult height, although there isn't one! "

Who is playing the role of Cuddlecat in the reconstruction?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Sir Edmund 'Cuddlecat' Hillary.

Head for heights!

by Seek truth 08.10.13 15:52

The SPECIAL McCanns .

The McCan do anything they like, couple, have had since 2007 the whole world searching for their daughter, but she has never been found.
The whole world knows about this case but NOBODY has found her. How can this be?

by ShuBob 08.10.13 15:56

Someone on Twitter made the point that Brunty was in Spain last week. Perhaps, he was really there for the Crimewatch alleged reconstruction and used the opportunity to hound an OAP ex-pat benefits cheat .

by lj 08.10.13 17:01

Tony Bennett wrote:Yesterday: Operation Grange say: 'Arrests imminent'

Today: Operation Grange say: 'We'll find Maddie alive'.

Are they morphing into Metodo 3?

I had the same thought, Tony. I guess by Christmas we'll know. winkwink

by lj 08.10.13 17:05

loopzdaloop wrote:
Ribisl wrote:
Hobs wrote:Since there were so many doctors present why did they not do cpr or treat whatever injuries and call 911 if it had been an accident?

The reason being awkward questions would be asked for one and secondly if she died it was vital an autopsy not be performed.

When a parent acts to prevent an autpsy or hides the body of their dead child, they have a reason to. Guilty knowledge.

What was so bad that the parents in particular and the group as a whole were prepared to face neglect charges resulting in a max 10 stretch rather than admit the truth?
Going off topic, sorry, but I am with you on this Hobbs. I've always believed that the key to understanding this case is to discover why they wouldn't allow an autopsy to be performed on Madeleine. Was it to hide

1. the evidence of medication that might have led to her demise?
2. the evidence of some physical abuse that might have directly or indirectly caused her death?
3. the evidence of sexual abuse?

I don't think they would have gone this length to cover up her death if the only uncomfortable truth that might emerge was her real paternity, for example.
4. Drugs.

They had a sleep behaviour reward chart on their fridge. The problem with behaviour modification systems is that they require effort and consistency over time and would certainly of not allowed abandonment and drinking time opposite adjàcent. Medical Doctors like to treat Symptoms and not the causes, so if the symptom is her waking up the treatment would be drugging to make her sleep. it was Kate's speciality, they got laxidasical, she woke up, climbed on sofa, slipped and cracked her head open. If the body was found the mccanns would be double or triples screwed as neglect resulting in accident AND unethical drugging would certainly result in loss of twins and their jobs and time in prison. They were between a rock and a hard place, yet morally bankrupt so we know what they chose.

That's number 1 on my list too. Additional arguments: the twins, probably sedated too, did not wake up with all the noise around them. Yet they did not have them checked in a hospital.

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".