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

by PeeWit 16.10.13 8:40

sami wrote:
Cheshire Cat wrote:
MoonGoddess wrote:
sami wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
sami wrote:
Woofer wrote:If SY have spoken to the Smiths I hope the Smiths told how they were harrassed by the Kennedy windows man and also Metodo 3
Smith told the Irish police about the visit in his statement.
I bet Mr Smith is wondering why his photo-fits weren't ever used. It's an odd one, why shell out money for them and not use them?
There is something not right about this, IMO. Smith said he had been asked to do an e-fit during the visit but had declined.

It would seem therefore he did them eventually, if what we know now is true.

Why would McCann PIs ask a man who they must have known had clearly suggested their client to be the man they saw to do an e-fit of him? Below is 30 jan 2008, a cover letter by Irish police.

Detective Branch
Drogheda
County Lough

Re – Investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann

I took an additional statement from Mr Smith as requested. His wife does not want to make another statement. I showed him the video clip and he stated that it was not the clip that alerted him but the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007.

He has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits. He sent a solicitor’s letter to six papers in relation material that was printed that was misquoted. The Evening Herald paid his solicitor's fees and all papers printed an apology. His photograph appeared in another tabloid paper and this matter is being pursued at the moment.

I do not believe that Martin Smith is courting the press and my view his is a genuine person. He is known locally and is a very decent person.

Forwarded please

Sergeant

L*** H****
I just asked that in another thread..... I am confused about that too.... surely Mr Smith would have been to wary to do it for anyone working for the guy he'd nailed?
It is possible that the e-fits were drawn up based on the original statements from the Smith family. Sounds unlikely that they would have met with Kennedy and Co. Amaral has said the man Smith saw might have been McCann but it was to be checked out when he was moved off of the case. Interesting that Mr Smith has not changed his view at all.
I will not be surprised if Smith man is discounted in the same way as Tanner man (also Pat Browns view) in order to 'clear' Gerry.
If Smith is discounted to clear Gerry and bundleman is now gone, where then is there any indication of an abduction ? If smith man is found and let us say he was another lost night crèche user, now all we have is a missing child, EVRD's evidence and the parents word. No dubious sightings, nothing.

So the only outcome is that smith man is THE man and he is named and now dead. Unless they produce Madeleine along with this ending, I don't think it's final enough, a dangerous move, IMO.

I’m sure I read (years ago) that Kennedy did visit the Smiths and the outcome was that the Smiths “agreed” to drop the percentage "certainty" from 80% to 60%, as to it being GM. Like I say a long time ago!

IMO, if SY had wanted to “clear Gerry” they would NOT have canned Tanner’s evidence so emphatically. It was, as someone mentioned earlier, GM’s “gold plated” alibi. The McCs would have been absolutely distraught when they were told this was going to happen.

And to discredit the sighting, by more than a few people, of a man carrying a little girl (matching M’s description) through PdL that night, and around the time SY are now convinced Madeleine was taken, cannot happen. Though nothing surprises me in this case – that would!

I cannot imagine what the pressure on the Tapas group must be now..

by sweetex 16.10.13 8:45

I’m sure I read (years ago) that Kennedy did visit the Smiths and the outcome was that the Smiths “agreed” to drop the percentage "certainty" from 80% to 60%, as to it being GM. Like I say a long time ago!

IMO, if SY had wanted to “clear Gerry” they would NOT have canned Tanner’s evidence so emphatically. It was, as someone mentioned earlier, GM’s “gold plated” alibi. The McCs would have been absolutely distraught when they were told this was going to happen.

And to discredit the sighting, by more than a few people, of a man carrying a little girl (matching M’s description) through PdL that night, and around the time SY are now convinced Madeleine was taken, cannot happen. Though nothing surprises me in this case – that would!

I cannot imagine what the pressure on the Tapas group must be now..

Exactly what I am thinking! And I'm very sure SY knows this and wants one of them (T7) to come forward

by russiandoll 16.10.13 8:49

quote " I will not be surprised if Smith man is discounted in the same way as Tanner man (also Pat Browns view) in order to 'clear' Gerry "

from Cheshire Cat.

Forgive me for sounding frustrated, but I never get an answer to this question.

WHY?

Please can one of you who thinks this is a huge conspiracy with more tentacles than an octopus, even if in a brief pm to me,,, tell me WHY you think this is the case ? I would really appreciate it, thank you !

[ I do get the logic by the way.... if no man comes forward Smithman and child are the abductor and victim who will never be found. Job done .]

I go with Occam's razor, and the conspiracy is way too complex for me, with too many people involved for whatever reason and too risky that someone will leak info by accident or design.

Imo given the type of guest there I would go for controversial medical research project rather than vip scandal esp involving children after what has been exposed in the media recently.

There has been speculation that one of the group had leverage on a big cheese in or near OC. Am always interested to hear what this might involve so please tell me your thoughts.

by riskybuisness 16.10.13 8:51

working on an old view:- the simplest answer is often the correct one.

Have any of you just considered the possibility that Madeline just walked out then something happened to her- abduction or as she was a small girl and it was dark , it would be very possible for her to has been knocked down. Say the driver had been drinking and then panicked picked her up and got rid of her. Now that would bring us back to the tapas lot and how they have acted since.

Well as far as I can see in this whole ordeal right from the start the focus for Gerry and Kate has been on themselves (I think their attitude is why sites like this exist)- They have never acted they way we would expect a mum and dad in that situation to do. Every interview has been on how they feel / how they are coping- where as, most of us would be constantly be talking about what our child could be going through and things we had done with them in the past. That brings me back to the tapas lot, and the smoke and mirrors situation, as I said this lot focus 1st and foremost on themselves, say they had been up to stuff that would be seen as unacceptable for doctors (over and above leaving small kids in alone). What if the coming and going had nothing to do with checking -this lot go into career preservation mode and smoke is started.

May be at the start when the police 1st arrived some of the tapas lot just thought there fabricated stuff wouldn't matter as they were expecting Madeline to be found soon (I remember reading somewhere that the older lady made some comment that she had run off previously). However, once their statements were given - they where tied in.

If you are all sure that the man the Smiths saw was Gerry- then could he have found Madeline dead out of the flat and then panicked - may be the other taps lot did not know this until much later (or even still believe she is missing), in the start they think they are just covering their tracks for career preservation as I fail to believe that 9 people would conspire to cover up the death of a child. If they had I am sure some would have mental health issues by now.

I am open minded in this case as I have no idea what actually took place, however, I do think that Gerry and Kate should be charged with other offences while the investigation continues- the 1st of which should be the neglect or abandonment of their children- they have no alibi and not enough smoke and mirrors to get out of that one.

by russiandoll 16.10.13 8:59

re : the " flush out" , an amusing true story AND IT INVOLVES DOGS !

Police bark like dogs to flush out suspects holed-up in house in New Haven, Connecticut

From: News Limited Network
April 01, 2013 11:58AM

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

The dogs were unavailable, so New haven police did the barking themselves to scare two crooks into surrendering. It paid off. Source: News Limited

POLICE had to improvise during a standoff to coax two suspects out of a house by literally barking like dogs.

New Haven Police Department said the two men had led officers on a car chase through the city before they were tracked down to a suburban house.
There, a standoff ensued with the masked men inside the building refusing to come out, New Haven's [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
As a dozen officers surrounded the house, police hostage negotiators threatened to unleash the canine units, but the dogs weren't available.
So they had officers pretend to bark like dogs and it worked.
The two men - who had stolen a car - walked outside and were arrested on the spot.
"They were trained. These cops were trained to do stuff like that," one witness said. "I guess that was the best technique to do what they needed to do to get people out."
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by russiandoll 16.10.13 9:07

riskybusiness...thanks for that interesting post. I agree that what happened to Madeleine is very simple. What has been complicated is the elaborate cover up afterwards.
All designed to deflect attention from where it should be directed.

The Tanner sighting....the only thing to make abduction something worth considering has quite rightly gone in the bin.

There is nothing left but an empty bed, a missing child and a man walking towards the ocean.

As stated by various people with experience in these matters on Sky last night.... empty apartments at this location, it was not an escape route and not a planned abduction because the MO in such cases would mean entry to abduct straight after a check...the new timeline does not allow this.

These were their opinions and conclusions based on the CW programme, on that alone they decided on the above NOT scenarios.

by SixMillionQuid 16.10.13 9:13

russiandoll wrote:quote " I will not be surprised if Smith man is discounted in the same way as Tanner man (also Pat Browns view) in order to 'clear' Gerry "

from Cheshire Cat.

Forgive me for sounding frustrated, but I never get an answer to this question.

WHY?

Please can one of you who thinks this is a huge conspiracy with more tentacles than an octopus, even if in a brief pm to me,,, tell me WHY you think this is the case ? I would really appreciate it, thank you !

[ I do get the logic by the way.... if no man comes forward Smithman and child are the abductor and victim who will never be found. Job done .]

I go with Occam's razor, and the conspiracy is way too complex for me, with too many people involved for whatever reason and too risky that someone will leak info by accident or design.

Imo given the type of guest there I would go for controversial medical research project rather than vip scandal esp involving children after what has been exposed in the media recently.

There has been speculation that one of the group had leverage on a big cheese in or near OC. Am always interested to hear what this might involve so please tell me your thoughts.

Operation Grange do not consider the MCanns as suspects. As far as they are concerned they have been eliminated from enquiries. If they were of interest we would not have had the Crimewatch appeal which would have been proved to have been a waste of time of money - as the McCanns would be suspects wouldn't they?

So if I can turn the question around. If you consider Mr Redwood is playing blinder and 300 people called Crimewatch on Monday to say who it was, what are you expecting Mr Redwood and his team to do now?

by riskybuisness 16.10.13 9:24

russiandoll wrote:riskybusiness...thanks for that interesting post. I agree that what happened to Madeleine is very simple. What has been complicated is the elaborate cover up afterwards.
All designed to deflect attention from where it should be directed.

The Tanner sighting....the only thing to make abduction something worth considering has quite rightly gone in the bin.

There is nothing left but an empty bed, a missing child and a man walking towards the ocean.

As stated by various people with experience in these matters on Sky last night.... empty apartments at this location, it was not an escape route and not a planned abduction because the MO in such cases would mean entry to abduct straight after a check...the new timeline does not allow this.

These were their opinions and conclusions based on the CW programme, on that alone they decided on the above NOT scenarios.

I certainly don't think any abduction took place from in the apartment, all the talk of doors being moved as evidence of an intruder just made me mad, every parent knows that if your kids disappears from the room you think they are in - the first thing you do is run through the house pushing doors this way and that until you find them. No one stops to look at door positions, I have only ever done that once and that was at arrival of my front door to find it open and we had been burgled,- kid missing the door is the last thing you'd notice. Having said that - I still think she could could have just wondered out looking for her aw-all parents.

I would not be overly surprised to find out that what you all think is correct but I would be very surprised to find out that the T9 were all aware of that. However, that does not mean that I think if the worst is proved they should not be prosecuted for perverting justice as they have had 6 years to come clean.

by endgame 16.10.13 9:24

In all the furore over the Smith sighting and the possibility that this may in fact be GM, I cannot conceive of a rational scenario that would actually place him there at 10 0'clock. Not that the answer needs to be rational of course.

Assuming that Madeleine suffered an accident sometime on the evening of May 3 [or earlier] and a fake abduction plan was hatched [the most commonly presented scenario] why would that plan involve GM wandering the streets of PdL with a dead child open to recognition at any time and at the very moment when he most needed to be seen at and around 5A? Even accepting that McCann timings and restaurant staff timings vary, I cannot get my head around why he would be doing this at that particular time. The other issue is fitting this into absolutely verifiable sightings of GM at the Ocean Club. If he was actually on his way to dispose of or hide Madeleine how long would that take him and is it conceivable that he would accomplish all this and get back within a timescale when he is absolutely known to be at OC?

I suppose you could argue that the "accident" happened much later and he was just getting out of there in a blind panic or that he was deliberately trying to create a dummy sighting [seems unlikely/ far too risky]. So given all his other options why would he have been there at that precise time?

The next question would be how, as some suggest, if he was about the process of disposal does this fit in with the cadaver odour in the car?

I can actually find no reasonable explanation for anyone - GM, planned abductor, burglar, whatever - to be carting Madeleine around a mile away from the OC at this time.

Anyone help?

by lj 16.10.13 9:25

admin wrote:
lj wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Read it and Weep

by Dr Martin Roberts

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
OMG that photo from Andy!! I haven't read a word yet, but you all have to go there a take a look at the photo. I think it says all.
Do you mean this one?

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

Yes, the look of someone with hallucinations.

by lj 16.10.13 9:27

sami wrote:
admin wrote:
lj wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Read it and Weep

by Dr Martin Roberts

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
OMG that photo from Andy!! I haven't read a word yet, but you all have to go there a take a look at the photo. I think it says all.
Do you mean this one?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
That's his revelation moment. Even he is amazed he is about to say bundle man is no more.

by **Tony Bennett** 16.10.13 9:32

riskybuisness wrote:working on an old view:- the simplest answer is often the correct one.

Have any of you just considered the possibility that Madeleine [sp.] just walked out then something happened to her...

Extremely unlikley on any view - and Drs Kate and Gerry McCann firmly ruled it out, so utterly sure were they - 'immediately' - that Madeleine had been abducted, and the shutters jemmied open, etc. etc.

Exactly the same thing has been suggested by those writing about Ben Needham, another case by the way where there is, in reality, zero evidence of abduction

I am open minded in this case as I have no idea what actually took place, however, I do think that Gerry and Kate should be charged with other offences while the investigation continues - the 1st of which should be the neglect or abandonment of their children - they have no alibi and not enough smoke and mirrors to get out of that one.

That has already been tried once - by myself. On 10 November 2007, I applied for a summons to Leicestershire and Rutland Magistrates Court (LRMC) on the grounds that Drs Kate and Gerry McCann had admitted - in lengthy newspapers and elsewhere - to leaving three children under 4 on their own for significant periods six evenings in a row. I applied for the summons under the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, which covers cases of neglect of this kind. I made this application in the home area of the McCanns because, under the Hague Convention 1998, such cases - where the alleged neglect has occurred abroad - must be pursued in the country where the parents are normally resident.

The Chairman of LRMC and its Chief Clerk immediately sought the advice of the Attorney-General, who swiftly advised the Magistrates Court that my application should be refused on the sole ground that I 'had not established beyond doubt that the court had jurisdiction to grant the summons'. And that was that. It is now effectively too late for the McCanns to be charged with an offence of child neglect, either in Portugal, or the U.K. I think a copy of the application I made - and the response I got from LRMC - are out on the internet somewhere.

by Truthandjustice 16.10.13 9:36

Fascinating the way the PJ are rubbished in the media, they 'overlooked' the smith sighting etc. The Mcs have tried to rubbish the PJ from the start and the spin continues. Perhaps they actually believed the PJ would be incompetent and would follow their version without question and it would all be done and dusted in a week or two. Unfortunately they got more than they bargained for!

by riskybuisness 16.10.13 10:10

endgame wrote:In all the furore over the Smith sighting and the possibility that this may in fact be GM, I cannot conceive of a rational scenario that would actually place him there at 10 0'clock. Not that the answer needs to be rational of course.

Assuming that Madeleine suffered an accident sometime on the evening of May 3 [or earlier] and a fake abduction plan was hatched [the most commonly presented scenario] why would that plan involve GM wandering the streets of PdL with a dead child open to recognition at any time and at the very moment when he most needed to be seen at and around 5A? Even accepting that McCann timings and restaurant staff timings vary, I cannot get my head around why he would be doing this at that particular time. The other issue is fitting this into absolutely verifiable sightings of GM at the Ocean Club. If he was actually on his way to dispose of or hide Madeleine how long would that take him and is it conceivable that he would accomplish all this and get back within a timescale when he is absolutely known to be at OC?

I suppose you could argue that the "accident" happened much later and he was just getting out of there in a blind panic or that he was deliberately trying to create a dummy sighting [seems unlikely/ far too risky]. So given all his other options why would he have been there at that precise time?

The next question would be how, as some suggest, if he was about the process of disposal does this fit in with the cadaver odour in the car?

I can actually find no reasonable explanation for anyone - GM, planned abductor, burglar, whatever - to be carting Madeleine around a mile away from the OC at this time.

Anyone help?

the only explanation I can think of is that she wondered out of the apartment and was found near to where the person was carrying her. But the next thing I am waiting for is for the story to be retold yet again and the mccans and co forgot that near the start of the search they took the twins with them to search and gerry was carring one down that rd.

by Eyei 16.10.13 10:12

candyfloss wrote:Star has the same only rather smaller

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

Is it a coincidence that the accompanying headlines are about dogs?

by Mélusine 16.10.13 10:49

Russiandoll,

why do I think this is a whitewash?

Because I believe that if it was genuine, the police would not act like this - Crimewatch programme, weird e-fits, a witness suddenly falls from the sky after 6 years, parents and Tapas are not suspects etc...

There was a case of missing 8 years old girl 3 years ago in the country where I come from... the way the police was acting, the information they gave, the appeals on TV ... everything was totally different to this.

I can't express my reasons better than it has already been done in this - already mentioned - article Read it and Weep by Dr. M. Roberts.

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

by Lance De Boils 16.10.13 11:05

Woofer wrote:
nobodythereeither wrote:
MoonGoddess wrote:Smith sighting man wasn't just heading towards the beach..... he was heading towards the Church

That's a very interesting observation.
Yes - that is interesting - must go and look at maps again.

Do you remember this article, too? I wonder where exactly this villa was? Did anyone ever figure it out?

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

Suspicions were raised because of the behaviour of the people who rented the £1million villa and because video cameras were reportedly seen there along with pictures of children on a wall, the Sunday Express has learned.

One elderly British resident told us both she and a friend, a retired British woman detective, went to Portuguese police about a couple who rented the villa, which has its own swimming pool.
The resident told us: “I used to meet up with the retired detective to walk our dogs down by the seafront. Both of us became concerned about a couple aged about 30 who rented the villa.

“What struck us was that they drove a very tatty, British-registered small red saloon car. It was one those vehicles you would normally see on a gypsy camp, not going in and out of a very expensive villa.

“We only saw them coming and going in the car and not walking about, which is odd given the location of the villa. We both got the impression they were trying to keep a low profile.’’

Another source said that after Maddie disappeared, search teams combed the seafront, where luxury villas stand next to large areas of barren land.

Anglican priest Paul Luckman, owner and publisher of Portugal News, said: “The location and description of that villa mentioned by your source fits the one that a searcher told me about.

“The searcher told me the villa was empty and somehow they got inside some weeks after Madeleine disappeared.
“The search dog handler said the villa had a room with a kind of amateur studio with video equipment and cameras with children’s toys and pictures of children on the wall.

“He felt it was something to do with paedophiles. He told the police and they seemed to know something about it, but we don’t think they took it any further.”
The Sunday Express took him to the villa and he confirmed that it fits the description and location of the one he was told about.
Although we know where it is, we are not naming the villa for legal reasons as we have been unable to locate the owner.
The British woman resident said: “I know the owner was contacted after we raised our concerns with the police.
"The person was angry because she said she did not know the people who rented it and was annoyed about being contacted by detectives.
"We heard nothing more about it. The day after Maddie disappeared the couple moved out and we didn’t see them again.
“There was an older woman in a very expensive car who visited them during their stay.”

by Guest 16.10.13 11:07

Crimewatch was a case of Mass media manipulation, they have to change the way people are thinking, more so with the on going libel trial, Twitter, Facebook, Forums will have been read by TM, they had to do something, imo they would have liked it to go out after the McCann people had given evidence, but they hadn't reckoned on trial delays.

Gerry's big gulp, Kate's black dress!! neither of them were able to maintain eye contact with the interviewer. They are not the victims, Madeleine was and remains the victim.

It made me so angry, I think a poster had said they looked frightened, yes I agree with that they are frightened because the PJ files are in the public domain GA's book can be read on line, excellant Forums and other sights like this one can be read and invited to become members to discuss and put their point of view. the libel trial has made hundreds if not thousands of people curious to know the truth, make no wonder the McCanns wanted to settle out of court.

The Parents & others
BBC
Crimewatch
Redwood & Co
MSM
Establishment

They all know what happened to Madeleine, imo Madeleine doesn't matter anymore to them, it's about shielding the parents at all costs and we all ask why?

SHAME ON THEM ALL

by russiandoll 16.10.13 11:09

Mélusine wrote:Russiandoll,

why do I think this is a whitewash?

Because I believe that if it was genuine, the police would not act like this - Crimewatch programme, weird e-fits, a witness suddenly falls from the sky after 6 years, parents and Tapas are not suspects etc...

There was a case of missing 8 years old girl 3 years ago in the country where I come from... the way the police was acting, the information they gave, the appeals on TV ... everything was totally different to this.

I can't express my reasons better than it has already been done in this - already mentioned - article Read it and Weep by Dr. M. Roberts.

Thank you for your reply and I understand it to a point, but what could be the reason for such an elaborate cover up ? This is what baffles me,

eta this is not a typical missing child case so maybe extraordinary measures are needed to solve it ?

by Cristobell 16.10.13 11:12

I have always found it very suspicious that the McCanns ignored the Smith sighting. If they were 100% confident that it was not Gerry, they would have saturated the media with e-fits and appeals as this sighting was far more credible than Jane Tanner's. They had the PJ files, they had the e-fits, but they sat on it, a strange thing to do as it would have added weight to the abduction story.

by russiandoll 16.10.13 11:12

Cherry Blossom...CW did go out after the McCann people gave evidence at the libel trial.. do you mean in case G and K are allowed to speak?

by Mélusine 16.10.13 11:20

russiandoll wrote:
Thank you for your reply and I understand it to a point, but what could be the reason for such an elaborate cover up ? This is what baffles me,

eta this is not a typical missing child case so maybe extraordinary measures are needed to solve it ?

The reason for such an elaborate cover up? I really wonder. And I don't know... that's why (not only) I started reading this forum and finally I signed up, I would really like to know what can make / could have made all those involved to help to cover it up. Although there are moments I think maybe I'd rather not to.

by MoonGoddess 16.10.13 11:35

Lance De Boils wrote:
Woofer wrote:
nobodythereeither wrote:
MoonGoddess wrote:Smith sighting man wasn't just heading towards the beach..... he was heading towards the Church

That's a very interesting observation.
Yes - that is interesting - must go and look at maps again.
Do you remember this article, too? I wonder where exactly this villa was? Did anyone ever figure it out?

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

Suspicions were raised because of the behaviour of the people who rented the £1million villa and because video cameras were reportedly seen there along with pictures of children on a wall, the Sunday Express has learned.

One elderly British resident told us both she and a friend, a retired British woman detective, went to Portuguese police about a couple who rented the villa, which has its own swimming pool.
The resident told us: “I used to meet up with the retired detective to walk our dogs down by the seafront. Both of us became concerned about a couple aged about 30 who rented the villa.

“What struck us was that they drove a very tatty, British-registered small red saloon car. It was one those vehicles you would normally see on a gypsy camp, not going in and out of a very expensive villa.

“We only saw them coming and going in the car and not walking about, which is odd given the location of the villa. We both got the impression they were trying to keep a low profile.’’

Another source said that after Maddie disappeared, search teams combed the seafront, where luxury villas stand next to large areas of barren land.

Anglican priest Paul Luckman, owner and publisher of Portugal News, said: “The location and description of that villa mentioned by your source fits the one that a searcher told me about.

“The searcher told me the villa was empty and somehow they got inside some weeks after Madeleine disappeared.
“The search dog handler said the villa had a room with a kind of amateur studio with video equipment and cameras with children’s toys and pictures of children on the wall.

“He felt it was something to do with paedophiles. He told the police and they seemed to know something about it, but we don’t think they took it any further.”
The Sunday Express took him to the villa and he confirmed that it fits the description and location of the one he was told about.
Although we know where it is, we are not naming the villa for legal reasons as we have been unable to locate the owner.
The British woman resident said: “I know the owner was contacted after we raised our concerns with the police.
"The person was angry because she said she did not know the people who rented it and was annoyed about being contacted by detectives.
"We heard nothing more about it. The day after Maddie disappeared the couple moved out and we didn’t see them again.
“There was an older woman in a very expensive car who visited them during their stay.”

It would be good to know where that Villa was!!

by russiandoll 16.10.13 11:48

Was I seeing things, or in the tapas meal recon. were the metal shutters on patio door DOWN ?

Meant to post this after show....lots going on so got distracted. will post the youtube clip

I see them leaving and closing patio doors closed curtains behind the door.

But, I am sure in some shots we see shutters down on that patio.

Bad production?

by MoonGoddess 16.10.13 11:50

riskybuisness wrote:
endgame wrote:In all the furore over the Smith sighting and the possibility that this may in fact be GM, I cannot conceive of a rational scenario that would actually place him there at 10 0'clock. Not that the answer needs to be rational of course.

Assuming that Madeleine suffered an accident sometime on the evening of May 3 [or earlier] and a fake abduction plan was hatched [the most commonly presented scenario] why would that plan involve GM wandering the streets of PdL with a dead child open to recognition at any time and at the very moment when he most needed to be seen at and around 5A? Even accepting that McCann timings and restaurant staff timings vary, I cannot get my head around why he would be doing this at that particular time. The other issue is fitting this into absolutely verifiable sightings of GM at the Ocean Club. If he was actually on his way to dispose of or hide Madeleine how long would that take him and is it conceivable that he would accomplish all this and get back within a timescale when he is absolutely known to be at OC?

I suppose you could argue that the "accident" happened much later and he was just getting out of there in a blind panic or that he was deliberately trying to create a dummy sighting [seems unlikely/ far too risky]. So given all his other options why would he have been there at that precise time?

The next question would be how, as some suggest, if he was about the process of disposal does this fit in with the cadaver odour in the car?

I can actually find no reasonable explanation for anyone - GM, planned abductor, burglar, whatever - to be carting Madeleine around a mile away from the OC at this time.

Anyone help?

the only explanation I can think of is that she wondered out of the apartment and was found near to where the person was carrying her. But the next thing I am waiting for is for the story to be retold yet again and the mccans and co forgot that near the start of the search they took the twins with them to search and gerry was carring one down that rd.

@endgame ... I must admit, I've been covered in confusion about this too... I had always previously believed that the 'blue bag' was the mode of transportation [genuine apologies for being graphic] I always understood that it took at least 90 minutes for cadaver scent to eminate... so I now presume it *could* be GM carrying a deceased MM... the only thing I am considering at the moment is the 'church', he was less than a minute or two from there, and heading in that direction [believe I am right in stating that dogs followed a trail there]..... last rites perhaps? protection from a Church that might be involved in something more sinister? [it has been known!]...

I'm also thinking along the lines of the Villa in the article that Lance De Boils posted...

I think the problem is, we are rational minded people trying to get into the mind of seriously warped individuals..

by MoonGoddess 16.10.13 11:51

russiandoll wrote:Was I seeing things, or in the tapas meal recon. were the metal shutters on patio door DOWN ?

Meant to post this after show....lots going on so got distracted. will post the yotube clip

I think? I also noticed the abductor leaving through the door? going to watch it again on 'catchup' later.

by russiandoll 16.10.13 11:54

I do not think that the man was carrying Maddie.

by russiandoll 16.10.13 11:55

MoonGoddess wrote:
russiandoll wrote:Was I seeing things, or in the tapas meal recon. were the metal shutters on patio door DOWN ?

Meant to post this after show....lots going on so got distracted. will post the yotube clip
I think? I also noticed the abductor leaving through the door? going to watch it again on 'catchup' later.

clearly upon exit, we see shutters open.

but during the meal when camera panned I am sure they were closed.

by Angelique 16.10.13 11:56

MoonGoddess

"It would be good to know where that Villa was"

Maybe it was this one referred to in this link.

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

I remember seeing a picture of GA standing in front of a particular Villa but I can't now find the picture. It could be the one because it is described as being in the same vicinity.