Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 1 DISCUSSION****

by aiyoyo 15.10.13 19:00

Sceneset wrote:Aiyoyo, thanks for the article re the mystery father.I do find it odd he had his daughter's pyjamas stored and ready to hand although i'm sure they wouldnt fit her anymore, six years on...and that he is still wearing clothes from so long ago. Odd that the pj's don't look 'frilly'. Tanner stated she saw a frill. Perhaps she imagined it in the orange light...

The problem I have is: why did he feel he needs to bring items to substantiate his story? Surely that's down to Police to verify by referencing records?
If he feels he may need to keep those items to support his story then why did he not come forward sooner?

by lj 15.10.13 19:02

Me wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong but even though they were on a program where Cider Andy stated the timeline had changed Gerry STILL maintained that on his 9:05 check the children's bedroom door was open wider than he left it.

I didn't imagine that did i?

So how could that have happened if the abduction was later?

Strikes me they have a problem in that their stories seem to have focused on the 9:15 sighting.

Me, good to see you.

Somewhere Andy says that he is not going to spill more time creating theories how Madeleine disappeared. It seems he kept his word. The interview and reconstruction are just a lot of facts and McCann-"facts" thrown together in an attempt (in my opinion) that an abduction was possible after all. They must have realized very quickly that the original story leaks as Andy himself, after he declared he would not give updates to the public.

It never made sense, and now even less.

It does show though how deep they will go to protect the British superiority.

It also shows the shamelessness of all involved, and the arrogance thinking people won't notice.

Time for my anti-nausea medication again.

by bobbin 15.10.13 19:06

candyfloss wrote:He has spoken

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] spokesman Clarence Mitchell says Amaral's remarks `nonsense' - `will not dignify this latest insult with any comment'

I'm always amused by the ass-about-tip pomposity of someone who "dignifies someone" by making the comment that he will not dignify someone by "making a comment". big grin

by aiyoyo 15.10.13 19:08

You have to wonder why the Mccanns did not use that pompous twat as their witness in the Libel trial!

by tiny 15.10.13 19:10

candyfloss wrote:Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Met Police say Kate and Gerry [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] are neither suspects nor `persons of interest' in their on-going investigation

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Crimewatch ed says `several' callers have given same name for [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] suspect..`always significant if callers call in with the same name'

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Scotland Yard say [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] probe now focussed on 55 mins between Gerry sighting at 9.05pm and Kate finding Madeleine gone from bed at 10pm

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] access was via windows - in 2 raids in same block in prev 3 weeks one was attempt & other `full blown burglary'

burglars do not pinch children, for gods sake when will rubbish stop

by aiyoyo 15.10.13 19:11

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 42m
Scotland Yard say #McCann probe now focussed on 55 mins between Gerry sighting at 9.05pm and Kate finding Madeleine gone from bed at 10pm

So Tanner's Bundleman is ruled out, but the abduction still could have occured at within that timeframe......hmmm.......?

by Guest 15.10.13 19:13

Read it and Weep

by Dr Martin Roberts

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

by Guest 15.10.13 19:15

aiyoyo wrote:
Sceneset wrote:Aiyoyo, thanks for the article re the mystery father.I do find it odd he had his daughter's pyjamas stored and ready to hand although i'm sure they wouldnt fit her anymore, six years on...and that he is still wearing clothes from so long ago. Odd that the pj's don't look 'frilly'. Tanner stated she saw a frill. Perhaps she imagined it in the orange light...
The problem I have is: why did he feel he needs to bring items to substantiate his story? Surely that's down to Police to verify by referencing records?
If he feels he may need to keep those items to support his story then why did he not come forward sooner?

Innocent British Fathers' (IBFs) pajamabottoms are BLUE

by Guest 15.10.13 19:18

candyfloss wrote:Read it and Weep

by Dr Martin Roberts

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

And taste carefully, and then cringe, at the last paragraph

Ah, a Kelly, a Kelly?

by aiyoyo 15.10.13 19:22

Portia wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:
Sceneset wrote:Aiyoyo, thanks for the article re the mystery father.I do find it odd he had his daughter's pyjamas stored and ready to hand although i'm sure they wouldnt fit her anymore, six years on...and that he is still wearing clothes from so long ago. Odd that the pj's don't look 'frilly'. Tanner stated she saw a frill. Perhaps she imagined it in the orange light...
The problem I have is: why did he feel he needs to bring items to substantiate his story? Surely that's down to Police to verify by referencing records?
If he feels he may need to keep those items to support his story then why did he not come forward sooner?
Innocent British Fathers' (IBFs) pajamabottoms are BLUE

Well, in tungsten lightings?

by Guest 15.10.13 19:23

aiyoyo wrote:
Portia wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:
Sceneset wrote:Aiyoyo, thanks for the article re the mystery father.I do find it odd he had his daughter's pyjamas stored and ready to hand although i'm sure they wouldnt fit her anymore, six years on...and that he is still wearing clothes from so long ago. Odd that the pj's don't look 'frilly'. Tanner stated she saw a frill. Perhaps she imagined it in the orange light...
The problem I have is: why did he feel he needs to bring items to substantiate his story? Surely that's down to Police to verify by referencing records?
If he feels he may need to keep those items to support his story then why did he not come forward sooner?
Innocent British Fathers' (IBFs) pajamabottoms are BLUE
Well, in tungsten lightings?

No dear, on UK TV last night, in Crimewatch

by Daisy 15.10.13 19:31

aiyoyo wrote:
The problem I have is: why did he feel he needs to bring items to substantiate his story? Surely that's down to Police to verify by referencing records?
If he feels he may need to keep those items to support his story then why did he not come forward sooner?

Also, why the pink blanket? Jane Tanner's sighting didn't have a blanket. Then to confuse matters more there's a dark pink blanket along with cuddlecat on the bed in the CW reconstruction.

by Truthandjustice 15.10.13 19:35

This is a really good read [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by russiandoll 15.10.13 19:43

Bobby Peru wrote:NSY's reliance upon the revised timeline is misjudged. Witness time estimates are often flawed. For example, a 'sighting' estimated at 10pm when the time was nearer 9.30pm or 9.45pm would neither be uncommon or implausible. Unless the witness checked their watch at that point or had very recently checked the time, then their estimate is nothing more than retrospective guess work.

Furthermore, there is not a single shred of evidence to suggest an abduction. None of the alleged sightings are evidence. Had Madeleine been accurately identified with a known or unknown individual, then that would have been credible evidence.

CW certainly did nothing to present any substantive evidence, It was largely an exercise in poor vignettes of melodrama that was more notable for its omissions rather than its content.

I remember a reference to Mr Smith having a receipt which helped him verify the time, he had paid the bar bill and left.

by Lance De Boils 15.10.13 19:50

Rufus T wrote:
Prehensile wrote:
Lance De Boils wrote:
"Kate and Gerry McCann will travel to Holland today and Germany tomorrow because the resort they were staying in is particularly popular with people from those countries and the suspect is believed to have a German or a Scandinavian accent."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I'm just wondering... for a non-English-speaking person, on hearing a Brit with a strong Glaswegian accent, might it be mistaken for another European accent?
Good observation LDB. I remember years ago my parents encouraging me to take German at school because of the way us Scots pronounce similarly to the German language.
Absolutely bang on , on several holidays to Spanish and Portuguese territories I have been mistaken for Dutch and German due to my being a Weegie.

Thank you. As I suspected.... yes

by **Hobs** 15.10.13 19:56

As statement analyst i got a tad irate when gerry proudly told the world when Maddie was born she was almost perfect!!

That right there provided for a motive.

Maddie wasn't perfect, she didn't fit in the classic perfect family, mom, dad a boy and a girl blonde blue eyed, good jpbs , professional, moving in the right circles with the right contacts.

Maddie was imperfect and even with IVF you can't return the faulty child and ask for a refund.

Was this why they avoided answering about having her fostered out or adopted?

Kate early on mentioned she was worried Maddie was going to turn out like her, we have mentions of her temper and being demanding and with kate she freely uses angry emotions to describe how she feels when things aren't going her own way, how she kicked and lashed out and smashed things when the PJ didn't believe her.
We saw the bruises on her upper arms and wrists , finger shaped bruises not brusises from hitting walls ( how do you hit a wall with your wrists and upper arms anyway?)
Deleted. This is not a fact ( clearly this is the case when she talks about pressing a button and killing all her family) does she think Maddie might have the same issues?

What was present that gerry instantly noticed she was almost perfect?
When a baby arrives the first thing checked is fingers and toes 1 head 2 arms 2 legs and the right bits. Anything out of the ordinary is picked up later.
So are we talking a physical problem or a mental problem ( most mental problems only arise over a period of time ( downs is clear due to the physical aspects)

Why did they airbrush out david paynes visit, the cadaverine and body fluids, the 48 question, the non reconstruction and numerous other technicalities.

I had to wait till this evening to calm down before i called the met and gave the nice officer a crash course in Statement analysis before going all the red flags.

by russiandoll 15.10.13 19:59

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Met Police say Kate and Gerry [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] are neither suspects nor `persons of interest' in their on-going investigation

JL makes this sound like a comment made yesterday, this was what Redwood replied to a q weeks ago.

I still do not believe that SY would imply G Smithman, so an argument could be made that he could never go to trial as a programme put him in the frame, too elaborate imo and why?

Our secret service covers up these dark secrets by burying them effectively, this is way to complex and conspiratorial for me and I still await an answer.

what is so monumental that all this money and time is spent on a cover up of this complexity?

by Woburn_exile 15.10.13 20:17

As a quick sideshow, I remember seeing a headline over the weekend along the lines of "First arrest in Madeleine case". I was travelling over the period so didn't pick up on it but this seems to have been totally evaded in the crimewatch programme.
Could this possibly be that SY know fine well what happened, have accepted that unless someone in the know comes forward and grasses them to save their own skin, then they will have no chance of a prosecution, so then SY are using this funding to witch hunt every single suspected paedo on the continent so that when they turn up the square root of fcku all that is new they can at least say "All efforts were made, we did not as yet find out definativly what happened to Madeleine McCann but at least our lines of enquiry have smashed Paedophile rings and terrorist groupings in Europe so from that perspective this operation has been as success". Our European colleagues should take a page from our book in the future bla bla BLAH VOMIT. The McCanns will be able to bask in their glory and write more drivelous books in the name of child protection and how they were instigators of it.

offtopic

by MoonGoddess 15.10.13 20:25

can someone help me out....

Realistically..... forgetting GM for a moment.... just who in England (because that was where CW was seen last night) could have phoned in "with the same name" - would these have been holiday makers in PDL on May 03? or people that live/lived there but were watching the programme last night? and do these people happen to know the same person? so much so that they are naming him? was he a familiar figure in PDL?... I just don't get how the English could "name" that person? if they were naming GM - why haven't they done it before now?...... sorry if I'm not making sense (so tired!!)

How does the priest in PDL fit with that photofit?...... Smith sighting man wasn't just heading towards the beach..... he was heading towards the Church

Thank You to whoever freezeframed the Smith sighting man..... barring the real thing, I don't think they could have got a better Gerry lookylikey laughat

by ChuckieD 15.10.13 20:31

In the local pub in Germany and the landlady, quite out of leftfield, said quite excitedly tomorrow at 20.15 two programmes are being shown with relation to the 'new' news. So not much seems to be getting out over here as she does keep a watch on current affairs.

by **Tony Bennett** 15.10.13 20:42

Hobs wrote:As a statement analyst...

"What was present that Gerry instantly noticed she was 'almost perfect'?"

Oddly enough, this is almost exactly what Kate McCann herself said both before and in her book, 'madeleine'.

Page 27: "After years of longing for this day, here we were: parents...And here she was:...the moment was extra special. Our daughter was perfect".

I've never heard anyone else describe their new-born child, or even any child, as 'perfect'.

It seems even odder that both parents should use the same very unusual word about their child.

by petunia 15.10.13 20:53

Hobs wrote:As statement analyst i got a tad irate when gerry proudly told the world when Maddie was born she was almost perfect!!

That right there provided for a motive.

Maddie wasn't perfect, she didn't fit in the classic perfect family, mom, dad a boy and a girl blonde blue eyed, good jpbs , professional, moving in the right circles with the right contacts.

Maddie was imperfect and even with IVF you can't return the faulty child and ask for a refund.

Was this why they avoided answering about having her fostered out or adopted?

Kate early on mentioned she was worried Maddie was going to turn out like her, we have mentions of her temper and being demanding and with kate she freely uses angry emotions to describe how she feels when things aren't going her own way, how she kicked and lashed out and smashed things when the PJ didn't believe her.
We saw the bruises on her upper arms and wrists , finger shaped bruises not brusises from hitting walls ( how do you hit a wall with your wrists and upper arms anyway?)
Deleted. This is not a fact ( clearly this is the case when she talks about pressing a button and killing all her family) does she think Maddie might have the same issues?

What was present that gerry instantly noticed she was almost perfect?
When a baby arrives the first thing checked is fingers and toes 1 head 2 arms 2 legs and the right bits. Anything out of the ordinary is picked up later.
So are we talking a physical problem or a mental problem ( most mental problems only arise over a period of time ( downs is clear due to the physical aspects)

Why did they airbrush out david paynes visit, the cadaverine and body fluids, the 48 question, the non reconstruction and numerous other technicalities.

I had to wait till this evening to calm down before i called the met and gave the nice officer a crash course in Statement analysis before going all the red flags.

hobs.i noticed he said almost perfect then almost straight after said she was a screamer could it be she was perfect when she was born but hadn't stopped been a screamer since.so putting the two together in his mind at that moment when talking about her.

by **Hobs** 15.10.13 20:55

Redwood: Erm that we really need to understand more about and identify who this person is."

I have a problem with this statement.

Intially he refers to men thus telling us the gender if not the identity.

Why then does he change from men to person?

Person is used to conceal not only the gender but also the identity, why does he decide to conceal the gender of the man he wants to talk, why not say man instead of the concealing person?

Does he perhaps know or suspect who it was and needs to conceal their identity for a reason?

by Lance De Boils 15.10.13 21:12

Tony Bennett wrote:
Hobs wrote:As a statement analyst...

"What was present that Gerry instantly noticed she was 'almost perfect'?"
Oddly enough, this is almost exactly what Kate McCann herself said both before and in her book, 'madeleine'.

Page 27: "After years of longing for this day, here we were: parents...And here she was:...the moment was extra special. Our daughter was perfect".

I've never heard anyone else describe their new-born child, or even any child, as 'perfect'.

It seems even odder that both parents should use the same very unusual word about their child.

I'm going to disagree with you there, Tony.
Everyone, in my experience, thinks their new-born is "perfect", especially first-time parents.
I've never heard anyone say "almost perfectly formed" though.

by bodiddly 15.10.13 22:21

The saying "almost perfectly formed" brings to mind a very premature baby. Does anyone know if Madeleine was premature.

It is indeed a very, very weird thing to say "almost" though perfect is how most people describe their newborn!