Steps and baby gate

by pulch 27.10.13 13:47

With the new info on the other thread that said about MM could of wondered out and Smith man had been suppressed. IMO I always thought it would be simple, so Iooked where the outside cadaver scent was found and it was in the flowerbed at the bottom of the stairs. I thought I read that a scent couldn't be light or heavy, its just a scent. But I read it was a light scent. I think they didn't check them regularly so didn't find her body for at least 50 mins or so. I think she got up after GM last check, climbed up to the baby gate, my daughter does this a lot and she started doing it from when she was 3. I think she went head over feet and got a nasty wound from falling. Those steps look very steep. She could of fell down into the flowerbed and died. Someone eventually discovered her and took her upstairs in the flat to their room, they cleared her up and changed her clothes. Hide the blood stained clothes, clean up materials behind the sofa, as the scent can cross contamine. Maybe they did go out with her looking for help, medical place closed, but panicked and decided to hide her somewhere. Maybe KM meant they've taken her as in Gerry had gone to hide her before she had said a last goodbye or something?? Or the planned abduction line just didn't come out right with nerves. We need a witness that saw a man with a tennis bag. All my own opinion and just a theory.

by Okeydokey 27.10.13 14:47

pulch wrote:With the new info on the other thread that said about MM could of wondered out and Smith man had been suppressed. IMO I always thought it would be simple, so Iooked where the outside cadaver scent was found and it was in the flowerbed at the bottom of the stairs. I thought I read that a scent couldn't be light or heavy, its just a scent. But I read it was a light scent. I think they didn't check them regularly so didn't find her body for at least 50 mins or so. I think she got up after GM last check, climbed up to the baby gate, my daughter does this a lot and she started doing it from when she was 3. I think she went head over feet and got a nasty wound from falling. Those steps look very steep. She could of fell down into the flowerbed and died. Someone eventually discovered her and took her upstairs in the flat to their room, they cleared her up and changed her clothes. Hide the blood stained clothes, clean up materials behind the sofa, as the scent can cross contamine. Maybe they did go out with her looking for help, medical place closed, but panicked and decided to hide her somewhere. Maybe KM meant they've taken her as in Gerry had gone to hide her before she had said a last goodbye or something?? Or the planned abduction line just didn't come out right with nerves. We need a witness that saw a man with a tennis bag. All my own opinion and just a theory.

An interesting theory. :)

If you believe in the evidence of the cadaver dogs, you can't discount the evidence of the flowerbed can you?

by pulch 27.10.13 15:26

The dogs is the only difficult part when you look at other options. If they were right of course!

by Okeydokey 27.10.13 15:37

pulch wrote:The dogs is the only difficult part when you look at other options. If they were right of course!

How many times did they alert? Was it 7? What are the chances of them alerting wrongly, seven times in succession...and both dogs on the same day presumably? That has got to be statistically a challenge! I think it's safest to put the dogs' evidence into the foundations of a timeline.

by ultimaThule 27.10.13 15:44

As cadaverine does not develop until 1.5-2 hours after death, the child's dead body would have had to lay in the flowerbed for this length of time and would inevitably have left a heavier scent than the light possibly fleeting odour Eddie detected when he, effectively, shrugged his canine shoulders as if to say 'maybe/maybe not' and failed to record his finding with a bark.

Your theory also fails to explain why there would be need to clean behind the sofa if the child died in the garden, or why she wasn't place on a bed or in the bath for the purpose of cleaning her body rather the floor by the wardrobe.

Had Madeleine died as a result of accidental injury, any delay in notifying the authorities could be explained by her parents both being doctors who have the ability to certify death and who were aware that, once her death had been reported, she would be removed to a mortuary to await autopsy - a prospect which would be worsened by the thought of her being subjected to this procedure in a foreign country.

Under the circumstances, it would be entirely understandable if any grief stricken parent delayed the inevitable moment of parting with the body of a beloved child who had died due to an unfortunate accident which autopsy will undoubtedly confirm.

There can only be one reason why the body was concealed which is that the findings of an autopsy would have caused the McCanns/their friends to account for the death of their daughter in a court of law with all that entails, including the potential removal of the twins from their care, loss of jobs/income, being struck off the Medical Register etc.

Once again, I repeat that I will never buy into any theory which has the McCanns and/or their friends panicked into disposing of a dead body.

by Guest 27.10.13 15:53

IMO the only "panic" was the carrier with child running into the Smith family, for which reason everybody assembled around the table to re-write the evening's script to fit, instead of running around and trying to find a child, who might have WAW and sat shivering in a dark cold corner somewhere, waiting to be found.

by ultimaThule 27.10.13 18:23

Châtelaine wrote:IMO the only "panic" was the carrier with child running into the Smith family, for which reason everybody assembled around the table to re-write the evening's script to fit, instead of running around and trying to find a child, who might have WAW and sat shivering in a dark cold corner somewhere, waiting to be found.

Please bear with me while I think out loud:

In the absence of an innocent third party and discounting the possibility that the child was abducted by a stranger who made his getaway on foot, we are left with 2 options which have been the subject of endless debate on this forum:

1. Smithman is GM carrying the body of his daughter to her temporary burial/resting place before hotfooting it back to 5A.

2. Smithman is GM carrying a live female child in order to give credence to his/his wife's assertion that Madeleine had been 'taken' from her bed by person/persons unknown who had gained entrance to the apartment either through the unjemmied shutters and open window, the unlocked patio doors, or by means of having obtained a key to the front door.

Ohe problem I have with theory no2 is why would it be necessary go to these lengths when JT had been primed to 'spot the abductor', and her alleged sighting is what the McCanns have attempted to focus the world's attention on from day 1? And why run the risk of being seen carrying the live female child on the return journey when there would be danger of being seen and identified by other residents/guests at the apartments/restaurant?

This may not be the thread to ask these questions but, until either 1 or 2 is discounted, I'm finding it diffcult to formulate a theory which has an end as well as a beginning.

I

by pulch 27.10.13 18:23

Do we know they cleaned behind the sofa or wasnt there just tiny spots of blood on the tiles, back of the sofa and one more somewhere nearby. I thought I read cadaver only takes 50 minutes? It was pointed out to me on here, that a panic seemed to happen as they quickly used her sticker book to write their timeline. Rubbish planning is it was planned from something happening on the 2nd. I just feel like its all a lot simpler than we think.

by Okeydokey 27.10.13 18:31

ultimaThule wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:IMO the only "panic" was the carrier with child running into the Smith family, for which reason everybody assembled around the table to re-write the evening's script to fit, instead of running around and trying to find a child, who might have WAW and sat shivering in a dark cold corner somewhere, waiting to be found.
  Please bear with me while I think out loud:

In the absence of an innocent third party and discounting the possibility that the child was abducted by a stranger who made his getaway on foot, we are left with 2 options which have been the subject of endless debate on this forum:

1. Smithman is GM carrying the body of his daughter to her temporary burial/resting place before hotfooting it back to 5A.

2. Smithman is GM carrying a live female child in order to give credence to his/his wife's assertion that Madeleine had been 'taken' from her bed by person/persons unknown who had gained entrance to the apartment either through the unjemmied shutters and open window, the unlocked patio doors, or by means of having obtained a key to the front door.

Ohe problem I have with theory no2 is why would it be necessary go to these lengths when JT had been primed to 'spot the abductor', and her alleged sighting is what the McCanns have attempted to focus the world's attention on from day 1?   And why run the risk of being seen carrying the live female child on the return journey when there would be danger of being seen and identified by other residents/guests at the apartments/restaurant?

This may not be the thread to ask these questions but, until either 1 or 2 is discounted, I'm finding it diffcult to formulate a theory which has an end as well as a beginning.

I

Well, following your logic, if one was to build such a hypothesis, you would have to say the JT sighting is a late addition (a concoction), required in order to deflect suspicion from the Smith sighting. Now that we know how much Team McCann did NOT want to focus on the Smith sighting, that hypothesis at least matches that.

But why carry your (presumably dead) child like that? It doesn't quite feel right to me.

by ultimaThule 27.10.13 20:19

Well, following your logic, if one was to build such a hypothesis, you would have to say the JT sighting is a late addition (a concoction), required in order to deflect suspicion from the Smith sighting.

That is an excellent point, okeydokey.

It could be JT's claim that she saw GM talking to JW before seeing bundleman was added to provide some substance as to what time an abduction may have taken place because, in the fictional account of the evening's events, when KM raised the alarm at 10pm her spouse was sitting with their pals in the restaurant and, although he believes he walks on water, couldn't be in 2 places at once ergo he could not be Smithman.

But why carry your (presumably dead) child like that? It doesn't quite feel right to me.

Are you referring to Smithman carrying a child over his shoulder? A man walking round the streets of even a quiet town such as Luz at c10pm on an early May evening would attract attenton if he was carrying an obviously dead female child, whereas a father carrying his sleeping daughter with her head resting on his shoulder would go unremarked.

If you're referring to bundleman carring a child over his arms, the only reason anyone would carry a child in that manner would be if the child's body was limp due to it being unconscious or dead.

by Okeydokey 27.10.13 21:35

ultimaThule wrote:Well, following your logic, if one was to build such a hypothesis, you would have to say the JT sighting is a late addition (a concoction), required in order to deflect suspicion from the Smith sighting.

That is an excellent point, okeydokey.

It could be JT's claim that she saw GM talking to JW before seeing bundleman was added to provide some substance as to what time an abduction may have taken place because, in the fictional account of the evening's events, when KM raised the alarm at 10pm her spouse was sitting with their pals in the restaurant and, although he believes he walks on water, couldn't be in 2 places at once ergo he could not be Smithman.

But why carry your (presumably dead) child like that? It doesn't quite feel right to me.

Are you referring to Smithman carrying a child over his shoulder? A man walking round the streets of even a quiet town such as Luz at c10pm on an early May evening would attract attenton if he was carrying an obviously dead female child, whereas a father carrying his sleeping daughter with her head resting on his shoulder would go unremarked.

If you're referring to bundleman carring a child over his arms, the only reason anyone would carry a child in that manner would be if the child's body was limp due to it being unconscious or dead.

I was referring to the Smithman sighting. I take your point. It still doesn't feel right to me, but that's not to say I discount the possibility.

by ultimaThule 27.10.13 22:23

When he saw a news item showing Gerry McCann disembarking from an easyjet flight carrying his sleeping son on the occasion of the McCanns' sudden return to the UK in September 2007, Mr Smith observed that Sean was being carried
in the same manner as the child resembling Madeline he'd seen in Luz on the night of 3 May 2007.

Have you seen footage of the McCanns' return from Portugal?

by suzyjohnson 28.10.13 1:24

In the light of yesterday's Smithman news and the withholding of evidence, I was trying to think of any reasons why the McCanns might want people to believe in an earlier abduction, 9.15 pm instead of 10 pm and I thought perhaps the evidence of the dogs might be relevant? Since it takes at least 90 minutes before a dead body leaves a scent, then the timing could make a considerable difference. If MM had watched her parents, through the lounge window, leave the apartment by 8.30 pm and had an accident at that time by falling from the sofa?

GM and KM were both out dining at this time, how could they explain to police? However, if people believe in the 9.15 pm Tanner sighting, then clearly, an accident could not have happened any later than 7.45 pm, when of course, MM's parents were home, therefore, no neglect?

It is usually assumed that GM had been in to 5A before he saw JW. Suppose he hadn't. Suppose he went in after his chat with JW, nearer to 9.25 pm, and discovered the worst? That would make some sense of JT's comment that she knew GM had already been into the apartment to check, a point important enough for her to state definitely that she knew. It also makes more sense of JT's comment that GM had been gone a long time and was probably watching football. .

by Curioser 28.10.13 2:36

pulch wrote:With the new info on the other thread that said about MM could of wondered out and Smith man had been suppressed. IMO I always thought it would be simple, so Iooked where the outside cadaver scent was found and it was in the flowerbed at the bottom of the stairs. I thought I read that a scent couldn't be light or heavy, its just a scent. But I read it was a light scent. I think they didn't check them regularly so didn't find her body for at least 50 mins or so. I think she got up after GM last check, climbed up to the baby gate, my daughter does this a lot and she started doing it from when she was 3. I think she went head over feet and got a nasty wound from falling. Those steps look very steep. She could of fell down into the flowerbed and died. Someone eventually discovered her and took her upstairs in the flat to their room, they cleared her up and changed her clothes. Hide the blood stained clothes, clean up materials behind the sofa, as the scent can cross contamine. Maybe they did go out with her looking for help, medical place closed, but panicked and decided to hide her somewhere. Maybe KM meant they've taken her as in Gerry had gone to hide her before she had said a last goodbye or something?? Or the planned abduction line just didn't come out right with nerves. We need a witness that saw a man with a tennis bag. All my own opinion and just a theory.

It's a nice idea pulch but have a look at the photo. The garden is at the foot of the stairs inasmuch as it's on the same level as the bottom of the stairs. If you tumbled down the stairs you wouldn't end up in the garden though.

If GM saw JT coming up the hill and briefly put Maddie down in the garden before picking her up once JT was gone and heading off into the town, later to be seen by the Smiths, that might explain a 'light' cadaver odour.

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

by Curioser 28.10.13 2:42

ultimaThule wrote:As cadaverine does not develop until 1.5-2 hours after death, the child's dead body would have had to lay in the flowerbed for this length of time and would inevitably have left a heavier scent than the light possibly fleeting odour Eddie detected when he, effectively, shrugged his canine shoulders as if to say 'maybe/maybe not' and failed to record his finding with a bark.

Your theory also fails to explain why there would be need to clean behind the sofa if the child died in the garden, or why she wasn't place on a bed or in the bath for the purpose of cleaning her body rather the floor by the wardrobe.

Had Madeleine died as a result of accidental injury, any delay in notifying the authorities could be explained by her parents both being doctors who have the ability to certify death and who were aware that, once her death had been reported, she would be removed to a mortuary to await autopsy - a prospect which would be worsened by the thought of her being subjected to this procedure in a foreign country.

Under the circumstances, it would be entirely understandable if any grief stricken parent delayed the inevitable moment of parting with the body of a beloved child who had died due to an unfortunate accident which autopsy will undoubtedly confirm.

There can only be one reason why the body was concealed which is that the findings of an autopsy would have caused the McCanns/their friends to account for the death of their daughter in a court of law with all that entails, including the potential removal of the twins from their care, loss of jobs/income, being struck off the Medical Register etc.

Once again, I repeat that I will never buy into any theory which has the McCanns and/or their friends panicked into disposing of a dead body.

I think you're right about this UT. The amount of blood required to soak through grout would suggest that she died behind the sofa. Even if you picked up a body from the garden and moved it upstairs (which seems unlikely), would you put it somewhere with cloth near it to soak up blood? I don't reckon.

I don't understand why the concealing and avoidance of autopsy and everything that goes along with it rules out the idea of panic for you. Can you expand a bit on that UT? When do you think it happened?

by **tigger** 28.10.13 6:16

We've gone into this some time ago, I think the topic is 'Accident + sofa= death. Really?

I didn't believe for a moment they were hiding the body that night. There was simply no time. It also doesn't explain:
Why Gerry wanted tracker dogs that very night
How the had time and opportunity to add a distinct eye defect to at least two photographs
Why they did not supply a recent photo from the holiday
How they had time to clean the floor - there were no cleaning materials in 5a.
How they knew where to hide a body -allegedly they' d not been out of OC
Why Murat flew back in a hurry
Why the telephone records of the whole week had to be erased

Certainly they were panicked, it went wrong, timings had to be changed, the T7 had to be instructed to get their story right with the new changes - all last minute adjustments. In fact the whole performance was only saved by later adjustments.

It's fairly clear that:
The time of discovery was changed
So an extra check had to be added
The GNR weren't masons and didn't understand Gerry's supplication performance
The Smiths had been too curious and too many
The shutters could not be raised
Jeremy Wilkins had to be inserted as it was a golden chance of a solid alibi to neutralise the Smiths
(Gerry could not know that they flew out soon afterwards, they could have turned up en masse the next day, he needed an independent alibi there and then)

Of course he was panicked and the 'It's a disaster!' Is on a par with Murat's 'The biggest c... up in history.'
The timeline was kicked into the long grass by the Smiths, so JW had to be used.
The shutters, the lynch pin of the story were another disaster, 'All shutters closed' was on the timeline and the key to their innocence. RM still gets it wrong in her statement and says that even the patio door shutters were closed. By that time those doors were the only way in. big grin

Those words tell me that for something to have gone wrong, there had to be a plan which should have gone right.

Psychology, logistics and timescale do not allow for discovery, planning disappearance and full back up from friends, some of whom barely knew the McCanns.

by pulch 28.10.13 9:11

What's your theory then Tigger?
I tryed looking for a picture thanks (sorry forgot your name) maybe she got up and stumbled into the flower bed? Or yes GM put her down as he saw Jez. I'm just having trouble with her falling behind the sofa and blood coming from that. Kids mouths do bleed a lot though. Knocked some teeth out? My daughters mouth and teeth bleed a lot more than the time she knocked her head on the corner of my table.

by **tigger** 28.10.13 11:00

pulch wrote:What's your theory then Tigger?
I tryed looking for a picture thanks (sorry forgot your name) maybe she got up and stumbled into the flower bed? Or yes GM put her down as he saw Jez. I'm just having trouble with her falling behind the sofa and blood coming from that. Kids mouths do bleed a lot though. Knocked some teeth out? My daughters mouth and teeth bleed a lot more than the time she knocked her head on the corner of my table.

See above, I don't know what really happened, but I am 100% sure that this theory for obvious reasons - many of which I've listed above - is impossible.
Why should Gerry also deny that he had 12 voice-mails on the 2nd of May? Why indeed delete all the calls prior to midnight on the 3rd?

Perhaps you could have a look at the link I provided in my answer? Accident + sofa = death? You only need to put that in the search box to get the topic.

by Curioser 28.10.13 12:49

pulch wrote:What's your theory then Tigger?
I tryed looking for a picture thanks (sorry forgot your name) maybe she got up and stumbled into the flower bed? Or yes GM put her down as he saw Jez. I'm just having trouble with her falling behind the sofa and blood coming from that. Kids mouths do bleed a lot though. Knocked some teeth out? My daughters mouth and teeth bleed a lot more than the time she knocked her head on the corner of my table.

Yes, I guess she could have got up and stumbled into the flower bed. I don't think teeth would be enough to kill her, do you?

by Okeydokey 28.10.13 13:27

tigger wrote:We've gone into this some time ago, I think the topic is 'Accident + sofa= death. Really?

I didn't believe for a moment they were hiding the body that night. There was simply no time. It also doesn't explain:
Why Gerry wanted tracker dogs that very night
How the had time and opportunity to add a distinct eye defect to at least two photographs
Why they did not supply a recent photo from the holiday
How they had time to clean the floor - there were no cleaning materials in 5a.
How they knew where to hide a body -allegedly they' d not been out of OC
Why Murat flew back in a hurry
Why the telephone records of the whole week had to be erased

Certainly they were panicked, it went wrong, timings had to be changed, the T7 had to be instructed to get their story right with the new changes - all last minute adjustments. In fact the whole performance was only saved by later adjustments.

It's fairly clear that:
The time of discovery was changed
So an extra check had to be added
The GNR weren't masons and didn't understand Gerry's supplication performance
The Smiths had been too curious and too many
The shutters could not be raised
Jeremy Wilkins had to be inserted as it was a golden chance of a solid alibi to neutralise the Smiths
(Gerry could not know that they flew out soon afterwards, they could have turned up en masse the next day, he needed an independent alibi there and then)

Of course he was panicked and the 'It's a disaster!' Is on a par with Murat's 'The biggest c... up in history.'
The timeline was kicked into the long grass by the Smiths, so JW had to be used.
The shutters, the lynch pin of the story were another disaster, 'All shutters closed' was on the timeline and the key to their innocence. RM still gets it wrong in her statement and says that even the patio door shutters were closed. By that time those doors were the only way in.

Those words tell me that for something to have gone wrong, there had to be a plan which should have gone right.

Psychology, logistics and timescale do not allow for discovery, planning disappearance and full back up from friends, some of whom barely knew the McCanns.

Succinct and persuasive! Gerry's supplication performance is in my view completely out of character - in fact very few middle class professionals would ever behave like that and GMcC, whose exhales arrogance with every breath is the last person to behave like that. What would be the point? It would only delay the Police understanding what had gone on.

ONe thing though, on that reading, why did GMcC give so much time over to chatting to JW? That can't have been in the original timeline.

by pulch 28.10.13 20:05

Curioser :-) no teeth wouldn't. Bang to the head and cut teeth/mouth. I do like your theory but how would falling behind the sofa cause a lot of blood. I think my blood behind the sofa is clean up materials.

by pulch 28.10.13 20:08

Tigger ok I'll read it thanks. God I wish I knew what happened!!!

by **tigger** 28.10.13 20:48

@okeydokey

JW wasn't in the original timeline. It was a chance encounter. There are a couple of JW topics.
He actually puts the time at between 8.45 and 9.15 but complained that he'd been pressured by TM to state the later time.

So JW was just a hold-up and the run down to PDL was still on the agenda, then he met the Smiths and suddenly a much better alibi essential. Enter the brilliant mind of GM...the revised timelines and Egman. In one stroke a view of the abductor, the impartial witness and GM.
But then the problem of the doors had not yet begun....see mcCannfiles.com Dr. Roberts 'Early Doors'.

Lots of theories, but imo Gerry is more like Delboy. Has to be nr. One, lots of swagger but you can count on it going pear-shaped.

I think there was no need for a written timeline until the JW meeting was linked to an abductor.
Trying to get JW to make it as late as possible - closer to 9.45 would have been ideal, then the Smith sighting too, would exclude Gerry.
For that would have been Eggman spotted a second time.
But the gap of half an hour for a five minute walk was hard to explain so the Smith sighting was ignored by TM.

by Mirage 28.10.13 21:10

tigger wrote:@okeydokey

JW wasn't in the original timeline. It was a chance encounter. There are a couple of JW topics.
He actually puts the time at between 8.45 and 9.15 but complained that he'd been pressured by TM to state the later time.

So JW was just a hold-up and the run down to PDL was still on the agenda, then he met the Smiths and suddenly a much better alibi essential. Enter the brilliant mind of GM...the revised timelines and Egman. In one stroke a view of the abductor, the impartial witness and GM.
But then the problem of the doors had not yet begun....see mcCannfiles.com Dr. Roberts 'Early Doors'.

Lots of theories, but imo Gerry is more like Delboy. Has to be nr. One, lots of swagger but you can count on it going pear-shaped.

I think there was no need for a written timeline until the JW meeting was linked to an abductor.
Trying to get JW to make it as late as possible - closer to 9.45 would have been ideal, then the Smith sighting too, would exclude Gerry.
For that would have been Eggman spotted a second time.
But the gap of half an hour for a five minute walk was hard to explain so the Smith sighting was ignored by TM.

GM pestered JW by phone to narrow down the time of their encounter but IIRC JW wouldn't shift from a 45min window. His wife BOD I believe alluded to getting fed up with the persistent calls.

by ultimaThule 28.10.13 21:16

Okeydokey wrote:
tigger wrote:We've gone into this some time ago, I think the topic is 'Accident + sofa= death. Really?

I didn't believe for a moment they were hiding the body that night. There was simply no time. It also doesn't explain:
Why Gerry wanted tracker dogs that very night
How the had time and opportunity to add a distinct eye defect to at least two photographs
Why they did not supply a recent photo from the holiday
How they had time to clean the floor - there were no cleaning materials in 5a.
How they knew where to hide a body -allegedly they' d not been out of OC
Why Murat flew back in a hurry
Why the telephone records of the whole week had to be erased

Certainly they were panicked, it went wrong, timings had to be changed, the T7 had to be instructed to get their story right with the new changes - all last minute adjustments. In fact the whole performance was only saved by later adjustments.

It's fairly clear that:
The time of discovery was changed
So an extra check had to be added
The GNR weren't masons and didn't understand Gerry's supplication performance
The Smiths had been too curious and too many
The shutters could not be raised
Jeremy Wilkins had to be inserted as it was a golden chance of a solid alibi to neutralise the Smiths
(Gerry could not know that they flew out soon afterwards, they could have turned up en masse the next day, he needed an independent alibi there and then)

Of course he was panicked and the 'It's a disaster!' Is on a par with Murat's 'The biggest c... up in history.'
The timeline was kicked into the long grass by the Smiths, so JW had to be used.
The shutters, the lynch pin of the story were another disaster, 'All shutters closed' was on the timeline and the key to their innocence. RM still gets it wrong in her statement and says that even the patio door shutters were closed. By that time those doors were the only way in.

Those words tell me that for something to have gone wrong, there had to be a plan which should have gone right.

Psychology, logistics and timescale do not allow for discovery, planning disappearance and full back up from friends, some of whom barely knew the McCanns.
Succinct and persuasive! Gerry's supplication performance is in my view completely out of character - in fact very few middle class professionals would ever behave like that and GMcC, whose exhales arrogance with every breath is the last person to behave like that. What would be the point? It would only delay the Police understanding what had gone on.

ONe thing though, on that reading, why did GMcC give so much time over to chatting to JW? That can't have been in the original timeline.

Gerry McCann is an opportunist.

If his chance meeting with JW took place at the time he claims it occurred it begs the question of why, having ordered his starter at the restaurant before leaving to check his children, he would take time to stop and chat when a simple 'hi, gotta dash - food's ready, see you tomorrow', or some commiseration to reflect the fact that JW was walking the streets with his child while others were enjoying themselves sans offspring, in passing would have sufficed.