The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!

Gerry's clothes

Page 4 of 15 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9 ... 15  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 08.04.14 19:42

@ultimaThule wrote:It's no more subjective than your own opinion, wlbts, and unless the child was illegally sedated, there would be no reason whatsoever to conceal either the death or the body if death was sustained due to accidental injury unless, of course, the intention was to claim abduction and milk the gullible public's wallets/purses for all they were worth.

But it is subjective, and I'm not claiming that my own opinion is not.  I'm pointing at people saying that the body would definitely not have been hidden if all that had happened is that Maddie had fallen to her death by accident.  It isn't a logical proof, it's subjective opinion.

You're doing it aswell.  You say

@ultimaThule wrote:
there would be no reason whatsoever to conceal either the death or the body if death was sustained due to accidental injury

which is purely your opinion, it isn't mine and I disagree.  You're stating this as fact, which it isn't.  If she fell and died, and was sedated, legally or otherwise, she was still left without adult supervision, and that is neglect.  If the same thing happened to one of my children while I went out on the piss, I'd expect to be arrested on neglect charges. Additionally, the McCanns were in a foreign country and probably had no idea what the legal situation would be.

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Carrry On Doctor on 08.04.14 20:01

One of the best debates I have seen going on here. Very little arguing, just alternative theories being rightly tested. Quite refreshing.

Taking various points on board, I am still of the firm opinion that the evening of the 3rd was staged in advance. No-one would have done anything like this before, so any plan, however well thought out, would have had been problematic.

Something that I have not seen discussed is the willingness of everyone to agree to a story at such short notice. If we were to suppose that the 'incident' did happen on the 3rd (and panic ensued), for a 'pact' to be formed, it would seem unlikely that unanimous agreement and active participation would be agreed to there and then. Faced with the snap choice of whether to assist covering up a death, I would have expected quite different opinions on the best way to deal with it....with 'coming clean' being being a strong argument put forward. For everyone to stick together, arriving at such a decision would have taken time and much thought/reflection. They are all intelligent people who would likely need time to weigh up the pros and cons.

IMO of course.
avatar
Carrry On Doctor

Posts : 385
Reputation : 186
Join date : 2014-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Guest on 08.04.14 20:07

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:It's no more subjective than your own opinion, wlbts, and unless the child was illegally sedated, there would be no reason whatsoever to conceal either the death or the body if death was sustained due to accidental injury unless, of course, the intention was to claim abduction and milk the gullible public's wallets/purses for all they were worth.

But it is subjective, and I'm not claiming that my own opinion is not.  I'm pointing at people saying that the body would definitely not have been hidden if all that had happened is that Maddie had fallen to her death by accident.  It isn't a logical proof, it's subjective opinion.

You're doing it aswell.  You say

@ultimaThule wrote:
there would be no reason whatsoever to conceal either the death or the body if death was sustained due to accidental injury

which is purely your opinion, it isn't mine and I disagree.  You're stating this as fact, which it isn't.  If she fell and died, and was sedated, legally or otherwise, she was still left without adult supervision, and that is neglect.  If the same thing happened to one of my children while I went out on the piss, I'd expect to be arrested on neglect charges.  Additionally, the McCanns were in a foreign country and probably had no idea what the legal situation would be.

WLBTS, interesting reading your theory. However I am not clear on this point. Are you saying that a child who dies from an accident while you are out on the piss is worse than a child being abducted while you are out on the piss, both scenarios arising from neglect and both resulting in the death of the child? And they decided in a split instant to go for the story of untold horrors at the hands of a paedophile abductor, rather than cradle and weep over the death of their child who they had just found dead from an accident. Why?


However it seems to be that being seen as neglectful parents WAS the primary concern of the McCanns.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Guest on 08.04.14 20:11

An accidental injury and death evening May 2. And not found behind the sofa sooner than morning May 3, would suffice to me [though I do have other theories, of course, as is unavoidable under the "known" circumstances].
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Guest on 08.04.14 20:18

@Carrry On Doctor wrote:One of the best debates I have seen going on here. Very little arguing, just alternative theories being rightly tested. Quite refreshing.

Taking various points on board, I am still of the firm opinion that the evening of the 3rd was staged in advance. No-one would have done anything like this before, so any plan, however well thought out, would have had been problematic.

Something that I have not seen discussed is the willingness of everyone to agree to a story at such short notice. If we were to suppose that the 'incident' did happen on the 3rd (and panic ensued), for a 'pact' to be formed, it would seem unlikely that unanimous agreement and active participation would be agreed to there and then. Faced with the snap choice of whether to assist covering up a death, I would have expected quite different opinions on the best way to deal with it....with 'coming clean' being being a strong argument put forward. For everyone to stick together, arriving at such a decision would have taken time and much thought/reflection. They are all intelligent people who would likely need time to weigh up the pros and cons.

IMO of course.
I totally agree with that and was going to post something similar to answer WLBTS.

If as WLBTS had suggested that they discovered MBM after raising the alarm then i don't think for one minute that the rest of the tapas group would provide alibis, lie and keep up this pretence for as long as they had. 

Would anyone seriously agree within an hour to cover up a death and lie to police to save some fellow holidaymakers bacon, and they admittedly said they didn't know the Mccann's all that well (apart from the Paynes). No IMO it would not happen.

If they had plenty of time for persuasion after other implications being discussed then yes i think they would be complicit if they believed that they could get charged as well (Sedation / neglect theory). Career's, lifestyles down the swanny etc.

Once they agreed on the story (which imo did not take place in that hour) then YES there was a lot of PRE PLANNING involved.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by ultimaThule on 08.04.14 20:22

Châtelaine wrote:An accidental injury and death evening May 2. And not found behind the sofa sooner than morning May 3, would suffice to me [though I do have other theories, of course, as is unavoidable under the "known" circumstances].
I can easily explain that one away, Chatelaine, and find reason for the appropriate authorities not to be notified until only an approximate time of death between, say, an 8-12 hour period could be determined.  
n
Or are we saying that those who conspired to cover up the death, and conceal the body, of a child who sustained accidental injury which proved fatal would balk at claiming no neglect occurred as one or more of them were present when death occurred?
avatar
ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by suzyjohnson on 08.04.14 20:57

@Cristobell wrote:
@suzyjohnson wrote:Did the twins wake up at all?00.53.22 1485

Reply “They didn’t. They didn’t”.

1485 “In the aftermath?”

Reply “No, and that was the other thing, she kept going into the twins, she kept putting her hands on the twins to check they were breathing, she was very much concerned in checking that they were okay. But they were okay, I mean, they were fine, they didn’t, they were asleep, but at the time it did seem weird, I remember thinking, you know, when the Police came they turned the lights on, there was loads of noise, obviously from the moment Kate discovered that Madeleine was gone, the screaming and the shouting and there was a lot of noise and they, they didn’t, you know, so much as blink”

-------------------------------------------------------------

IMO, looking at this evidence, Fiona Payne was never involved in staging a cover up ( or she wouldn't have told the police the above information) It follows, IMO, that MM was not missing for more than a few hours (prior to the evening of May 3rd), otherwise other members of the Tapas group would have noticed. 

If the Smith family did see GM, then I think the child he was carrying would have been MM. He would have thrown away any of these clothes to avoid being identified by the Smith witnesses.  
.
Gerry didn't throw the clothes away Suzy, he was wearing the trousers with the buttons down the side (as described by Mrs Smith) when he did his 'wider agenda' presentation.

It's possible, as UltimaThule says, that GM had more than one pair of the same trousers.

It's also possible, if he didn't throw the trousers away, that GM brought the trousers back to England with him, before the PJ brought the dogs in.

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1192
Reputation : 261
Join date : 2013-03-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Guest on 08.04.14 21:11

@ultimaThule wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:An accidental injury and death evening May 2. And not found behind the sofa sooner than morning May 3, would suffice to me [though I do have other theories, of course, as is unavoidable under the "known" circumstances].
I can easily explain that one away, Chatelaine, and find reason for the appropriate authorities not to be notified until only an approximate time of death between, say, an 8-12 hour period could be determined.  
n
Or are we saying that those who conspired to cover up the death, and conceal the body, of a child who sustained accidental injury which proved fatal would balk at claiming no neglect occurred as one or more of them were present when death occurred?
***
It may be the late hour, ultimaThule, but I've lost you ... Could you elaborate? Or PM me?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by ultimaThule on 08.04.14 21:37

I posted what I consider to be a credible explanation for such an eventuality some time ago, Chatelaine... I'll try to find it or recreate it after supper or, if not, tomorrow - it's been a very long day!
avatar
ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by j.rob on 08.04.14 21:42

@rainbow-fairy wrote:
@j.rob wrote:...SNIPPED...
"I also think it is possible that at this stage Madeleine was not dead, but heavily sedated and possibly grievously ill."
How would this square with the dog alerts though? M taken back to 5a between the 4th May and the move to the villa? Risky I would have thought, and for what purpose?

One theory that I think is possible is that the McCann intention was to fake Madeleine's abduction (it has been done before - Shannon Matthews in the UK, Elizabeth Smart in the US - this case, in particular, I think may have 'inspired' the McCann story). Elizabeth Smart was 'found' 9 months later alive and well and seemingly remarkably unperturbed by her experiences of being (allegidly) abducted,  chained in a lyre and raped. Google the case - it is remarkably fishy and has, imo, all the hall-marks of a faked abduction. The circumstances, though, are very different as she was much older, probably rowing with her parents and ran away.

The Smart case, though, inspired the Amber Alert system in the US - and turned the Smarts into a celebrity couple as well as making them money - and I think it is possible that the McCanns had similar objectives in mind

But something happened to Madeleine during the week which scuppered the 'live abduction' plan. Quite possibly an adverse reaction to the sedatives, for instance. Or she fell, possibly while sedated. Or an adult struck out in anger. Or something.

So the plan was modified. She was removed sedated but also ill/injured. (I don't discount that she could have been dead when removed from the resort, simply saying it is possible that she wasn't dead at that stage). The McCanns could not/would not admit to the accident/adverse reaction as it would have uncovered too big a can of worms (more than neglect - because that is self-evident). I think there are pointers towards her having been molested as well. I would be suspicious of DB in this regard. 

It there were other people involved in the plan to fake an abduction of Madeleine, it is possible that the McCann's themselves were not entirely sure what was going on after Madeleine was removed from the resort. They appeared to gather together a cast of extremely shady characters  very quickly and I would not trust any of their motives. 

Dr Roberts, in his analyses of this case, quotes Gerry, in early interviews after Madeleine's 'disappearance'  as alluding to a 'hand-over', talking about 'keys' to unraveling where she is and so on. There are indications that other people are/were involved. 

It is also possible that Gerry knew more about what was going on than Kate, for instance, particularly if one considers that the Gasper statements might be relevant to this case. 

Having been removed from the resort - which was essential while police searched were going on - Madeleine subsequently died (if not already dead) and (perhaps) was subsequently brought back to the apartment while the McCanns decided what to do with her body. 

In any event, whether alive or dead on the night of the staged abduction, Madeleine clearly had to be removed from the resort that night so that she would not be found in police searches that night and in the subsequent days.

Was her body subsequently brought back, when the McCanns thought they had diverted attention elsewhere, or not? The references to Gerry having disposed of a fridge/freezer might indicate that her body was brought back. In any event, if the sniffer dog evidence from the car indicates that their hire car had been used to remove her corpse. In which case, where was it kept?

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 233
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Carrry On Doctor on 08.04.14 22:15

@j.rob wrote:
@rainbow-fairy wrote:
@j.rob wrote:...
cut...

But something happened to Madeleine during the week which scuppered the 'live abduction' plan. Quite possibly an adverse reaction to the sedatives, for instance. Or she fell, possibly while sedated. Or an adult struck out in anger. Or something.

cut...

My thoughts for some time (unintentional consequences I would add). Equally as plausible as sedation, perhaps even more so given doctors would know what a safe dosage is.

IMO naturally
avatar
Carrry On Doctor

Posts : 385
Reputation : 186
Join date : 2014-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Guest on 08.04.14 22:25

@JRob.

Always thoroughly enjoy reading your detailed analogies and in depth reasoning's of your posts.

I was unfamiliar with the Elizabeth Smart case until i did a bit of background reading on it. I believe it was purported on another thread at some point today.

A agree that there are a lot of similarities, however i think the Mccann's drew inspiration from this case AFTER the 3rd of May and IMO not prior. 

Yes, that i can see that there are certain things that can hold some weight in that theory but to me it's over complicating things.

I just cant believe that the Mccann's and the rest of the tapas group went away on holiday together with a pre planned abduction / kidnapping going to be carried out of a near 4 year old girl.

However, i do believe that during the aftermath then similarities of that particular case were taken. 

IMO obviously.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 08.04.14 23:33

dantezebu wrote:
WLBTS, interesting reading your theory. However I am not clear on this point. Are you saying that a child who dies from an accident while you are out on the piss is worse than a child being abducted while you are out on the piss, both scenarios arising from neglect and both resulting in the death of the child? And they decided in a split instant to go for the story of untold horrors at the hands of a paedophile abductor, rather than cradle and weep over the death of their child who they had just found dead from an accident. Why?

However it seems to be that being seen as neglectful parents WAS the primary concern of the McCanns.

Why?

One option leads to possible prison time, the other doesn't (if you get away with it).

The primary concern of the McCanns was to avoid prison.

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Bishop Brennan on 09.04.14 6:54

@j.rob wrote:...
It was a two man/woman job (minimum). So Jane is watching out to see if the coast is clear and Gerry is planning on forcing the shutters up. Jane needs to be near the apartment at 9.15pm for all sorts of reasons - to provide an alibi for Gerry, to case the joint, to 'sight' Tannerman, help remove Madeleine and so on

Jez Wilkins appears which prevents Gerry (or someone else)  from jemmying the shutters at 9.15pm.  However, it has the advantage of providing an alibi for Gerry. Curiously, though, although Jane sees both Gerry and Jez, they do not see her. 

Gerry goes back to the table but slightly later than planned - placing the time-lines in jeopardy - and also warning the others of the glitch. 


That part of the theory holds together really quite nicely. Here's a tweak that incorporates why Gerry and Jez did not see JT.  

I suspect that JT had passed by well before Gerry and Jez had their chat.  This puts JT at the front of the building - where perhaps she spotted 'crecheman' - walking the other way and earlier than 9.15pm.   And of course, if the jemmying didn't happen, another 9.15pm event was needed - one that was not part of the original plan. Hence 'tannerman' with just a slight change of where and when JT spotted him.  

It's close to the truth which is always wise. JT did see someone carrying a kid; Jez and Gerry are telling the truth - they didn't see JT or tannerman.

It might also explain why it took AR a while to match crecheman and tannerman; why crecheman was walking the other way; and why 'tannerman' was a late addition to the timeline / official story.
avatar
Bishop Brennan

Posts : 695
Reputation : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Guest on 09.04.14 7:02

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
dantezebu wrote:
WLBTS, interesting reading your theory. However I am not clear on this point. Are you saying that a child who dies from an accident while you are out on the piss is worse than a child being abducted while you are out on the piss, both scenarios arising from neglect and both resulting in the death of the child? And they decided in a split instant to go for the story of untold horrors at the hands of a paedophile abductor, rather than cradle and weep over the death of their child who they had just found dead from an accident. Why?

However it seems to be that being seen as neglectful parents WAS the primary concern of the McCanns.

Why?

One option leads to possible prison time, the other doesn't (if you get away with it).

The primary concern of the McCanns was to avoid prison.

People don't become pyscopathic overnight, or in the case above in minutes.
To find your daughter dead and have the immediate reaction you propose the people involved would have to be deviod of any normal human emotion at all. No emapthy, no fear no guilt. And that aspect fits in with them leaving the children night after night. And supports your theory.
Also to risk going to prison for a much longer time, for concealment of the body could also be regarded as reckless, and a narcissistic trait.
However panic doesn't fit the scenario, and a person with these traits who had decided on that course of action, especially a "high functioning psychopath", would not take any risks without first weighing up the best options. Meticulous planning would be necessary.
And that would include not walking through the streets with a dead child where there might be cctv ect. Letiing your companions know what you have done or propose to do would also would not be an option.
That is aside from the cleaning up, the bleaching of the floor with time for it to dry and for the smell to go, actually having bleach in the apartment, the washing of the curtains, the opening of the window, the opening of the shutters, the making of the bed, the deleting of phone records etc. All this takes thought and time. Also there were too many people around to do this without being noticed.

So although you theory fits in with some of the evidence, for me it doesn't work with all of it.

Many people searched that apartment before the police were called. If I couldn't find my daughter I would initially think she might be hiding from me. Thats a game 3-4 year old love. Behind the curtains, behind the sofa, in the wardrobes, that's where I would look first.



avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Bishop Brennan on 09.04.14 7:15

@Cristobell wrote:Gerry didn't throw the clothes away Suzy, he was wearing the trousers with the buttons down the side (as described by Mrs Smith) when he did his 'wider agenda' presentation.[/color]

Whether Gerry had one pair or a dozen, the key points are that:

a) A sharp-eyed Smith daughter spotted the button detail and colour
b) The button detail is not a particularly common style (for middle-aged men)
c) Gerry had a pair that exactly match the description
d) Mr Smith was 60-70% certain that it was Gerry he saw

There was some speculation as to whether this was MO or ROB, but the trousers say otherwise. If it was any of the T9, then it was Gerry. What was he up to? Decoy or disposal? Reading the posts, and assuming Amaral is correct, I probably go with decoy - presumably as part of the original story which involved jemmying and an abduction closer to the 9.45 / 9.50 mark. So no need to dispose of the trousers.

The odd thing is that once they had added 'tannerman', there was no need for Smithman any more. In fact he was a distraction that did not fit the new narrative. This perhaps explains why the efits were suppressed, and also left out of the 'bewk'. The attempt to suggest that tannerman and smithman are the same person was clumsy and shouted of a belated attempt to take care of an unwanted element.
avatar
Bishop Brennan

Posts : 695
Reputation : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 09.04.14 8:13

dantezebu wrote:
People don't become pyscopathic overnight, or in the case above in minutes.
To find your daughter dead and have the immediate reaction you propose the people involved would have to be deviod of any normal human emotion at all. No emapthy, no fear no guilt. And that aspect fits in with them leaving the children night after night. And supports your theory.
Also to risk going to prison for a much longer time, for concealment of the body could also be regarded as reckless, and a narcissistic trait.
However panic doesn't fit the scenario, and a person with these traits who had decided on that course of action, especially a "high functioning psychopath", would not take any risks without first weighing up the best options. Meticulous planning would be necessary.
And that would include not walking through the streets with a dead child where there might be cctv ect. Letiing your companions know what you have done or propose to do would also would not be an option.
That is aside from the cleaning up, the bleaching of the floor with time for it to dry and for the smell to go, actually having bleach in the apartment, the washing of the curtains, the opening of the window, the opening of the shutters, the making of the bed, the deleting of phone records etc. All this takes thought and time. Also there were too many people around to do this without being noticed.

So although you theory fits in with some of the evidence, for me it doesn't work with all of it.

Many people searched that apartment before the police were called. If I couldn't find my daughter I would initially think she might be hiding from me. Thats a game 3-4 year old love. Behind the curtains, behind the sofa, in the wardrobes, that's where I would look first.

Just because you can't imagine someone capable of something doesn't mean they aren't. I suggest that unless you've been in that situation - finding your child dead in a foreign country - you have no idea what a person would do. I'm interested in your theories on panic and pyschopathy, I assume you have the academic background to give this some weight?

As for the time taken to clean up, I've addressed that several times in the last few pages. All they had to do initially was wipe the floor and push the sofa up to the window. The forensic cleaning of the apartment can have occurred much later.

I can delete my phone records in under a minute, even with a long call history.

I can open in a window in seconds.

I can open a shutter in seconds.

whatliesbehindthesofa

Posts : 1320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Miraflores on 09.04.14 8:30

b) The button detail is not a particularly common style (for middle-aged men)

Not now, maybe.  At the time you could buy trousers which could be worn either rolled down to the calves, or buttoned up as shorts. I think they have rather gone out of fashion now, but I am pretty sure that when the fashion was new there would have been lots around for both men and women.
avatar
Miraflores

Posts : 845
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Guest on 09.04.14 8:34

WLBTS "Just because you can't imagine someone capable of something doesn't mean they aren't. I suggest that unless you've been in that situation - finding your child dead in a foreign country - you have no idea what a person would do. I'm interested in your theories on panic and pyschopathy, I assume you have the academic background to give this some weight?

As for the time taken to clean up, I've addressed that several times in the last few pages. All they had to do initially was wipe the floor and push the sofa up to the window. The forensic cleaning of the apartment can have occurred much later.

I can delete my phone records in under a minute, even with a long call history.

I can open in a window in seconds.

I can open a shutter in seconds."

I know what I would do in that situation. And I am sure most people can say the same thing about themselves WLBTS. There is no way that I could even contemplate putting my interests above that of the child seemingly dead before me. I would start resuss and call for an ambulance, or scream the place down at the realisation that the most precious thing in the world that I could ever have hoped to have, my child, was dead.
And if I had to spend a few years in prison for neglect it would never be enough punishment for me.

When in your opinion do you think they have time to clean the room? It was never empty after the police were called and then sealed off.
Bearing in mind it was really cleaned with no trace of Madeleine left.
Panic is caused by an overwhelming sense of fear. Psychopatic individuals do not experience fear. That's why they figure at the top of the lists where a lack of fear and panic is a desirable trait. But you know this already.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by HelenMeg on 09.04.14 9:44

@Bishop Brennan wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:Gerry didn't throw the clothes away Suzy, he was wearing the trousers with the buttons down the side (as described by Mrs Smith) when he did his 'wider agenda' presentation.[/color]

Whether Gerry had one pair or a dozen, the key points are that:

a) A sharp-eyed Smith daughter spotted the button detail and colour
b) The button detail is not a particularly common style (for middle-aged men)
c) Gerry had a pair that exactly match the description
d) Mr Smith was 60-70% certain that it was Gerry he saw

There was some speculation as to whether this was MO or ROB, but the trousers say otherwise. If it was any of the T9, then it was Gerry.  What was he up to?  Decoy or disposal?  Reading the posts, and assuming Amaral is correct, I probably go with decoy - presumably as part of the original story which involved jemmying and an abduction closer to the 9.45 / 9.50 mark. So no need to dispose of the trousers.  

The odd thing is that once they had added 'tannerman', there was no need for Smithman any more.  In fact he was a distraction that did not fit the new narrative. This perhaps explains why the efits were suppressed, and also left out of the 'bewk'.   The attempt to suggest that tannerman and smithman are the same person was clumsy and shouted of a belated attempt to take care of an unwanted element.  
Thats a good clear and concise summary Bishop - I would have to agree with all of this, including the "belated attempt at taking care of the unwanted element" being clumsy

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 208
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Doug D on 09.04.14 9:46

And don't forget the 'disappearing toothbrushes' that logic, not evidence, dictates would probably have been used to scrub between the tiles

Doug D

Posts : 2457
Reputation : 846
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by HelenMeg on 09.04.14 10:09

@Doug D wrote:And don't forget the 'disappearing toothbrushes' that logic, not evidence, dictates would probably have been used to scrub between the tiles
Yes ! I hadn't ever thought much about the lack of toothbrush.. but of course ! It is indeed a logical explanation - toothbrushes are great for those little crevices between tiles. They had nothing else to hand. Replacing the toothbrush from a local supermarket would have been a good idea - which tends to indicate to me that maybe the event took place later rather than sooner. Or maybe they tried to purchase a toothbrush replacement but ended up buying sunglasses.

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 208
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by Clocker on 09.04.14 10:30

@HelenMeg wrote:
@Doug D wrote:And don't forget the 'disappearing toothbrushes' that logic, not evidence, dictates would probably have been used to scrub between the tiles
Yes ! I hadn't ever thought much about the lack of toothbrush.. but of course ! It is indeed a logical explanation - toothbrushes are great for those little crevices between tiles. They had nothing else to hand. Replacing the toothbrush from a local supermarket would have been a good idea - which tends to indicate to me that maybe the event took place later rather than sooner. Or maybe they tried to purchase a toothbrush replacement but ended up buying sunglasses.
The one toothbrush has always baffled me, never believed they shared just the one. That's a good observation above and the highlighted part made me chuckle. There had to be a reason behind KM mentioning the purchase of the sunglasses.

____________________
My opinion only

Clocker

Posts : 87
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by jeanmonroe on 09.04.14 10:32

@HelenMeg wrote:
@Doug D wrote:And don't forget the 'disappearing toothbrushes' that logic, not evidence, dictates would probably have been used to scrub between the tiles
Yes ! I hadn't ever thought much about the lack of toothbrush.. but of course ! It is indeed a logical explanation - toothbrushes are great for those little crevices between tiles. They had nothing else to hand. Replacing the toothbrush from a local supermarket would have been a good idea - which tends to indicate to me that maybe the event took place later rather than sooner. Or maybe they tried to purchase a toothbrush replacement but ended up buying sunglasses.
-----------------------------------------------------
Or maybe they tried to purchase a toothbrush replacement but ended up buying sunglasses
--------------------------------------------------------------

I tried brushing my teeth with a pair of sunglasses!

Not very good, they don't 'bend' very much AND toothpaste keeps sliding off!

 laughat  laughat  laughat 


jeanmonroe

Posts : 5818
Reputation : 1663
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Gerry's clothes

Post by HelenMeg on 09.04.14 10:44

@jeanmonroe wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:
@Doug D wrote:And don't forget the 'disappearing toothbrushes' that logic, not evidence, dictates would probably have been used to scrub between the tiles
Yes ! I hadn't ever thought much about the lack of toothbrush.. but of course ! It is indeed a logical explanation - toothbrushes are great for those little crevices between tiles. They had nothing else to hand. Replacing the toothbrush from a local supermarket would have been a good idea - which tends to indicate to me that maybe the event took place later rather than sooner. Or maybe they tried to purchase a toothbrush replacement but ended up buying sunglasses.
-----------------------------------------------------
Or maybe they tried to purchase a toothbrush replacement but ended up buying sunglasses
--------------------------------------------------------------

I tried brushing my teeth with a pair of sunglasses!

Not very good, they don't 'bend' very much AND toothpaste keeps sliding off!

 laughat  laughat  laughat 

Yes, well now you mention it, when I tried shielding my eyes from the sun with my toothbrush - it was totally useless - wont make that mistake again winkwink

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 208
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 15 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9 ... 15  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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