Anyone for scraps?
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Latest News and Debate :: Debate Section - for purporting theories
Page 11 of 11 • Share
Page 11 of 11 • 1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11
Re: Anyone for scraps?
nglfi wrote:This is what gets me about the McCanns, they played out the abduction scenario so poorly, and it seems obvious to anyone with a brain they are lying, but still they get away with it!
I believe this abduction was just a charade and because the whole focus was on making it look like an abduction, they forgot that normal people, on fidning their child missing, would not immediately leap to the assumption it was an abduction.
'They've taken her!' rather than 'Madeleine's disappeared!'
I guess it's not like the movies where the tough cop sits the suspects down and refuses to let them leave until they explain the inconsistencies and lies. It seems like in the rogatory interviews, Leicestershire police just let the tapas 9 talk and talk, without ever highlighting any problems in the story. I didn't realise this is how policing is done.
I've always thought that "they've taken her" was genuine. There's no other explanation for using those words - they can't have been choice words for someone acting out a part in a charade like this.
If we accept the above as true, then what does it mean?
MM died, was left in situ, Kate when to see her, or to help Gerry with cleaning up or disposing of the body and found the apartment empty, "they" -perhaps Gerry and DP - had taken her.
Remember, we dont know what REALLY happened that night, i think people take the version of events as merely an exaggeration of what really happened - to me, I doubt whether there were any checks whatsoever, and the whole game of tennis earlier in the day was a fabrication
phil_burton- Posts : 86
Activity : 97
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2013-10-14
Re: Anyone for scraps?
phil_burton wrote:nglfi wrote:This is what gets me about the McCanns, they played out the abduction scenario so poorly, and it seems obvious to anyone with a brain they are lying, but still they get away with it!
I believe this abduction was just a charade and because the whole focus was on making it look like an abduction, they forgot that normal people, on fidning their child missing, would not immediately leap to the assumption it was an abduction.
'They've taken her!' rather than 'Madeleine's disappeared!'
I guess it's not like the movies where the tough cop sits the suspects down and refuses to let them leave until they explain the inconsistencies and lies. It seems like in the rogatory interviews, Leicestershire police just let the tapas 9 talk and talk, without ever highlighting any problems in the story. I didn't realise this is how policing is done.
I've always thought that "they've taken her" was genuine. There's no other explanation for using those words - they can't have been choice words for someone acting out a part in a charade like this.
If we accept the above as true, then what does it mean?
MM died, was left in situ, Kate when to see her, or to help Gerry with cleaning up or disposing of the body and found the apartment empty, "they" -perhaps Gerry and DP - had taken her.
Remember, we dont know what REALLY happened that night, i think people take the version of events as merely an exaggeration of what really happened - to me, I doubt whether there were any checks whatsoever, and the whole game of tennis earlier in the day was a fabrication
But what is the citation for that statement? Is it on record? I don't think it is.
Okeydokey- Posts : 938
Activity : 1013
Likes received : 31
Join date : 2013-10-18
Re: Anyone for scraps?
If your daughter had disappeared, could you still carry on doing outdoor activities? Did they think they were bugged so it is the only way they could communicate? Having not followed the disappearance at the time closely this was the thing that always seemed plain wrong.
jack dexter- Posts : 48
Activity : 57
Likes received : 7
Join date : 2014-05-24
Re: Anyone for scraps?
jack dexter wrote:If your daughter had disappeared, could you still carry on doing outdoor activities? Did they think they were bugged so it is the only way they could communicate? Having not followed the disappearance at the time closely this was the thing that always seemed plain wrong.
Very good point.
Yes, I think that was one (only one - there were many) of the early alarm bells. You can't say it is completely anomalous behaviour...perhaps someone might react to grief or loss like that. But I would say it is unusual behaviour - the point is, it has to be added to lots of other examples of unusual behaviour which together makes a pattern.
It seems to me that an intelligent couple under suspicion might indeed decide that running together provides opportunities to talk knowing there are no listening devices around.
Okeydokey- Posts : 938
Activity : 1013
Likes received : 31
Join date : 2013-10-18
Page 11 of 11 • 1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11
Similar topics
» Clarke hits greedy solicitors as he scraps no win, no fee deals
» Digging to start next week (continuation of automatically locked thread) - UPDATE... starting today 2/6/14
» Digging to start next week (continuation of automatically locked thread) - UPDATE... starting today 2/6/14
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Latest News and Debate :: Debate Section - for purporting theories
Page 11 of 11
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum