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!

something nefarious

Page 2 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by ultimaThule on 16.12.13 22:27

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

As I've already said, this is an argument from incredulity, i.e. an argument that starts with 'I cannot buy into any theory that...'.

For further information: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

You used the word 'incredulity', I used the word 'credulity'.

To my mind, your theory does not differ materially from many such which have appeared here of late. While I appreciate there may shortly be need for plausible reasons to be put forward in mitigation, nevertheless, I remain incredulous any notion of 'panic' continues to be posited in this forum which has dedicated itself to exposing the truth behind the extremely calculated and contrived lies of individuals to whom this state of mind is an alien concept as they have always relied on their ability to fool others in order to 'get away with it' and, to date, have succeeded in doing precisely that.
avatar
ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 16.12.13 22:43

@ultimaThule wrote:
You used the word 'incredulity', I used the word 'credulity'.

To my mind, your theory does not differ materially from many such which have appeared here of late.  While I appreciate there may shortly be need for plausible reasons to be put forward in mitigation, nevertheless, I remain incredulous any notion of 'panic'  continues to be posited in this forum which has dedicated itself to exposing the truth behind the extremely calculated and contrived lies of individuals to whom this state of mind is an alien concept as they have always relied on their ability to fool others in order to  'get away with it' and, to date, have succeeded in doing precisely that.  

Come on, are you accusing me of being a 'plant'? My theory disagrees with yours, but I am as equally entitled to give my opinion as you. And I've tried to give it in a polite manner - you won't get any 'I AM RIGHT' internet warrior rubbish from me, I will and do respect any other theories that fit the facts, including yours.

whatliesbehindthesofa

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by currio on 16.12.13 23:20

ultima Thule

I would be keen to know what your theory is. You make some real interesting posts. Perhaps your not willing to post it, which I can understand as I have my own theory which I would not possibly think of writing.

currio

Posts : 71
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by Mirage on 16.12.13 23:37

@ultimaThule wrote:
@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

As I've already said, this is an argument from incredulity, i.e. an argument that starts with 'I cannot buy into any theory that...'.  

For further information: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

You used the word 'incredulity', I used the word 'credulity'.

To my mind, your theory does not differ materially from many such which have appeared here of late.  While I appreciate there may shortly be need for plausible reasons to be put forward in mitigation, nevertheless, I remain incredulous any notion of 'panic'  continues to be posited in this forum which has dedicated itself to exposing the truth behind the extremely calculated and contrived lies of individuals to whom this state of mind is an alien concept as they have always relied on their ability to fool others in order to  'get away with it' and, to date, have succeeded in doing precisely that.  

You can be left in no doubt about the calculating nature of GM from the Paxman interview. He appears to me to thrive on risk and danger. If  you freeze the video at intervals during the ghastly smile, part of that smile is an aggressive signal to Paxman in the baring  of teeth. I believe anthropological studies support this interpretation.

He is also enjoying the dominance struggle, fancying himself an intellectual equal when the truth is Paxman is hobbled by legal constraints. Like the bullfighter flourishing his cape in triumph, and in denial that the bull was weakened before the kill.

Mirage

Posts : 1904
Reputation : 757
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by russiandoll on 16.12.13 23:43

I would not be surprised to find out that a forensic psychologist had been commissioned by Op Grange for an assessment of the McCanns re how they both rate on the scale of psychopathy.

 I believe strongly as a layperson, from my admittedly limited reading, that one scores very highly and the alarm bells would have gone off a long time ago with the team at SY.

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy

avatar
russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 16.12.13 23:54

@Mirage wrote:
You can be left in no doubt about the calculating nature of GM from the Paxman interview. He appears to me to thrive on risk and danger. If  you freeze the video at intervals during the ghastly smile, part of that smile is an aggressive signal to Paxman in the baring  of teeth. I believe anthropological studies support this interpretation.

He is also enjoying the dominance struggle, fancying himself an intellectual equal when the truth is Paxman is hobbled by legal constraints. Like the bullfighter flourishing his cape in triumph, and in denial that the bull was weakened before the kill.

Yes, I would agree with that assessment of Gerry's nature, he does seem to 'get off on it'.  That's one of the reasons why I have no qualms over hypothesizing that he may have been capable of making a split second decision to hide a dead body, and carry it through the streets of Praia da Luz.

whatliesbehindthesofa

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by Daisy on 17.12.13 0:07

@Mirage wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:
@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

As I've already said, this is an argument from incredulity, i.e. an argument that starts with 'I cannot buy into any theory that...'.  

For further information: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

You used the word 'incredulity', I used the word 'credulity'.

To my mind, your theory does not differ materially from many such which have appeared here of late.  While I appreciate there may shortly be need for plausible reasons to be put forward in mitigation, nevertheless, I remain incredulous any notion of 'panic'  continues to be posited in this forum which has dedicated itself to exposing the truth behind the extremely calculated and contrived lies of individuals to whom this state of mind is an alien concept as they have always relied on their ability to fool others in order to  'get away with it' and, to date, have succeeded in doing precisely that.  

You can be left in no doubt about the calculating nature of GM from the Paxman interview. He appears to me to thrive on risk and danger. If  you freeze the video at intervals during the ghastly smile, part of that smile is an aggressive signal to Paxman in the baring  of teeth. I believe anthropological studies support this interpretation.

He is also enjoying the dominance struggle, fancying himself an intellectual equal when the truth is Paxman is hobbled by legal constraints. Like the bullfighter flourishing his cape in triumph, and in denial that the bull was weakened before the kill.

Do you have faith in Jeremy Paxman? A solid establishment guy that's worked for the beeb since 1977. Nah, he's what us tinfoil hat brigade call controlled opposition. He's sold out in favour of his future prospects and paypacket  far too many times for me to offer any respect.

Besides, if he had any clout he'd have made mincemeat of McCann, he didn't. Tut Tut...

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche
avatar
Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by ultimaThule on 17.12.13 2:31

I have faith that Jeremy Paxman's intellect is far superior to that of Gerry McCann's and I have no doubt that, were he able to interview GM again on matters relating to Madeleine's disappearance, Jeremy would do far more than make mincemeat of Gerry - he'd shred him and reduce him to a quivering heap of stuttering inarticulateness, stumbling over his words and dropping himself in it with every sentence he was able to string together.    

As the youtube clip shows, Paxman's contempt for GM was barely concealed yet was clearly lost on him.   Such is GM's conceit,  he believes his intellectual abilities are unrivalled and, as he is not accustomed to being unable to fool others, he would do considerably less well than Michael Howard when faced with a Paxman who was relentless in pursuit of an answer to one particular question.

I agree that GM Is capable of making split second decisions wlbts but, in this particular instance, he would seek to evaluate the risk to that most precious of beings, namely himself, before carrying a dead body through the streets of Luz and it is, therefore, IMO not a course of action he would embark on with undue haste albeit that, once determined on such a plan, it's one he would carry out with relish.  

This thread has relevance here as it provides some insight into the true nature of the man behind the mask of apparent social acceptability: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t8687-article-from-psychology-today#208338
avatar
ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by Curioser on 17.12.13 4:41

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:
You used the word 'incredulity', I used the word 'credulity'.

To my mind, your theory does not differ materially from many such which have appeared here of late.  While I appreciate there may shortly be need for plausible reasons to be put forward in mitigation, nevertheless, I remain incredulous any notion of 'panic'  continues to be posited in this forum which has dedicated itself to exposing the truth behind the extremely calculated and contrived lies of individuals to whom this state of mind is an alien concept as they have always relied on their ability to fool others in order to  'get away with it' and, to date, have succeeded in doing precisely that.  

Come on, are you accusing me of being a 'plant'?  My theory disagrees with yours, but I am as equally entitled to give my opinion as you.  And I've tried to give it in a polite manner - you won't get any 'I AM RIGHT' internet warrior rubbish from me, I will and do respect any other theories that fit the facts, including yours.

Nevermind wlbts, you've come of age when you've been accused of being a plant just because you disagree with someone's theory.

____________________
I have no direct knowledge of the case. I'm just reading the files. It's all speculation. Don't sue me!
avatar
Curioser

Posts : 166
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-05-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by Curioser on 17.12.13 4:45

@currio wrote:ultima Thule

I would be keen to know what your theory is. You make some real interesting posts. Perhaps your not willing to post it, which I can understand as I have my own theory which I would not possibly think of writing.

UltimaThule and Currio, if you have theories that you subscribe to, in the interest of open debate it would be good to hear them. I was very nervous about posting mine, but the the world has not ended and the Carter **cks have not descended upon me.
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t7822-theory-purported-by-curioser-title-changed-from-any-advice-etc
I'd be interested in your opinion whatliesbehindthesofa. We have many similarities and some differences. In my opinion, far from being a criticism the observation that many of the independent theories are similar makes them more likely to be close to the truth.

____________________
I have no direct knowledge of the case. I'm just reading the files. It's all speculation. Don't sue me!
avatar
Curioser

Posts : 166
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-05-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by tigger on 17.12.13 7:49

@ultimaThule wrote:
@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

Because if it was an accident and there was no time to do anything else, I'm sure Gerry would have just sat there with a body waiting for the police, career soon to be in tatters and the strong possibility of jail time looming over his head.

I'm not saying that it was an accident and Gerry panicked.  I'm saying that I don't understand at all why yourself and others think the 'blind panic' theory is so impossible to consider.

As their various appearances on celebrity sofas around the globe demonstrate, neither GM or his spouse do 'panic'.   For a glimpse of the true nature of the beast see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIvFkXkVn1I

I've yet to read a theory which explains why there would be need to conceal the body of a child who sustained accidental injury, or injuries, which proved fatal.  

It would indeed be an unfortunate parent who lost their career or found themselves facing the prospect of jail time because their child met with a fatal accident of the kind which happens to numerous children both in Portugal and the UK on an annual basis.

Apart from the fact that they clearly had friends in high places who could smooth things over for them, spin them and make them as pure as the driven snow.
Imo what 'happened' was meant to happen, except for one or two unforeseen complications.

Gerry never walked with a dead body through PdL
The GNR dogs were interested in the car park. Iirc. Gerry wanted dogs the same night, At 2 am they were operational, they'd have picked up on cadaver scent in 5a , on Gerry and on the route. I think the false trail laid didn't work either.
Very bad for someone who needs to be in control, you might almost call it a disaster....

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by Curioser on 17.12.13 8:23

@tigger wrote:

(snip)
Gerry never walked with a dead body through PdL
The GNR dogs were interested in the car park. Iirc. Gerry wanted dogs the same night, At 2 am they were operational, they'd have picked up on cadaver scent in 5a , on Gerry and on the route. I think the false trail laid didn't work either.
Very bad for  someone who needs to be in control, you might almost call it a disaster....

The GNR dogs weren't cadaver dogs. They were given the pink blanket to sniff as being Madeleine's scent and they followed the scent they were given. Madeleine's scent would have been all through apartment 5A so there was no point getting the GNR dogs to look there. Eddie, the cadaver dog was not brought in until July.

But yes, a total disaster.

____________________
I have no direct knowledge of the case. I'm just reading the files. It's all speculation. Don't sue me!
avatar
Curioser

Posts : 166
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-05-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by Guest on 17.12.13 8:33

@Curioser wrote:
@tigger wrote:

(snip)
Gerry never walked with a dead body through PdL
The GNR dogs were interested in the car park. Iirc. Gerry wanted dogs the same night, At 2 am they were operational, they'd have picked up on cadaver scent in 5a , on Gerry and on the route. I think the false trail laid didn't work either.
Very bad for  someone who needs to be in control, you might almost call it a disaster....

The GNR dogs weren't cadaver dogs. They were given the pink blanket to sniff as being Madeleine's scent and they followed the scent they were given. Madeleine's scent would have been all through apartment 5A so there was no point getting the GNR dogs to look there. Eddie, the cadaver dog was not brought in until July.

But yes, a total disaster.

Yes, but Gerry didn't know what the exact capabilities of any dog that turned up would be. For instance, a cat got run over and killed in our street last week. On our walk later our dog, a Jack Russell, pulled me to the spot it had been scooped up from some hours earlier and got quite upset.

To me, the fact that Gerry requested the dogs meant he was confident that nothing incriminating could be found, but he wanted to be seen to be "doing everything" (except actually searching of course).
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 17.12.13 9:42

@ultimaThule wrote:
I agree that GM Is capable of making split second decisions wlbts but, in this particular instance, he would seek to evaluate the risk to that most precious of beings, namely himself, before carrying a dead body through the streets of Luz and it is, therefore, IMO not a course of action he would embark on with undue haste albeit that, once determined on such a plan, it's one he would carry out with relish.

Yes, I do agree with you here, but it's the 'evaluation of risk' where we differ. To a narcissist, being on the national news for neglecting your small children and allowing one of them to die, with very possible hints of sedation, would be enough in my opinion to tip the scales towards self preservation. Regardless of jail-time and ruined careers, this would be anathema to someone with narcissistic traits. The other potential consequences can only have added to his decision.

What courses of action are there?

1) Wait for the police, tell the truth,

2) Conceal the body, don't tell the truth.

Outcomes of (1) are castigation in the media, and very possible legal consequences from a foreign police force. Outcomes of (2) are possibility of being caught, which bring with it all the outcomes of (1). But with (2) he could also get away with it scott free.

If somebody wants and likes to take risks, and cannot bear public castigation, course of action (2) makes more sense.

whatliesbehindthesofa

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by tigger on 17.12.13 10:36

@Curioser wrote:
@tigger wrote:

(snip)
Gerry never walked with a dead body through PdL
The GNR dogs were interested in the car park. Iirc. Gerry wanted dogs the same night, At 2 am they were operational, they'd have picked up on cadaver scent in 5a , on Gerry and on the route. I think the false trail laid didn't work either.
Very bad for  someone who needs to be in control, you might almost call it a disaster....

The GNR dogs weren't cadaver dogs. They were given the pink blanket to sniff as being Madeleine's scent and they followed the scent they were given. Madeleine's scent would have been all through apartment 5A so there was no point getting the GNR dogs to look there. Eddie, the cadaver dog was not brought in until July.

But yes, a total disaster.

I know - have you never had a dog? They'd definitely pick up cadaver odour, one of their favouritesit seems to me.
In fact the first two dogs weren't search and rescue, the were for crowd control. So otherwise ordinary dogswho'd have gone for that interesting scent no matter what. Imo
Besides, the point  is that  Gerry  wanted dogs  asap - it's all easily  found here withreferencesi if you type 'dogs' in the searchbox.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 17.12.13 10:54

@tigger wrote:
I know - have younever hada dog? They'dcertainly pick up cadaver odour, one of their favouritesit seems to me.
In fact the first two dogs weren't search and rescue, the were for crowd control. So otherwise ordinary dogswho'd have gone for that interesting scent no matter what. Imo
Besides, the point  is that  Gerry  wanted dogs  asap - it's all easily  found here withreferencesif you type 'dogs' in the searchbox.

Which doesn't mean much when the scent that the sniffer dogs were working from was the blanket given by the McCanns.  Not shoes, not any clothes that Madeleine may have worn during the week.  A blanket.  What are the odds that Madeleine's scent was on it at all?

I can understand Gerry's obsession over the dogs.  If I was to put myself in his position for a moment, sniffer dogs would be the top thing I would be concerned about.  You have already said that you're prepared to believe he left a false trail.  And using somebody else's scent would create a false trail.  Again, I point you towards the source of Madeleine's scent - the blanket.  That would be the last item I would give.  Shoes would be number one on my list, considering that dogs are close to the ground, and shoes get smelly.  So the item that was given was the least useful item that could be given.  Why?

Somebody creating a false trail across Praia da Luz makes little sense.  Firstly, the trail that the dogs followed into the car-park makes a lot of sense if this particular trail was made deliberately (I don't think it was).  An abductor would most likely have a car waiting, and get away ASAP.  If I was going to make a false trail, the car park trail is the one I would make. The trail that I would definitely not make is the one going across the streets of PDL, which runs the risk of being spotted and identified, by people and by CCTV.  This would be complete madness.  In the 'blind panic' theory, there would have been very little choice in walking across PDL with the dead body.  In the pre-planned theory, making a false trail defies logic because there are other, much better, much safer choices - such as the car park trail.

There is another possibility - that Gerry was trying to lead the police to Madeleine's body, to close the situation off.  Perhaps the idea was for Maddy to be found in the early hours of the morning, but the sniffer dogs went the wrong way.  Just throwing this one out, I don't believe it at all :)

whatliesbehindthesofa

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by Guest on 17.12.13 10:55

@tigger wrote:
I know - have you never had a dog? They'd definitely  pick up cadaver odour, one of their favouritesit seems to me.
In fact the first two dogs weren't search and rescue, the were for crowd control. So otherwise ordinary dogswho'd have gone for that interesting scent no matter what. Imo
Besides, the point  is that  Gerry  wanted dogs  asap - it's all easily  found here withreferencesi if you type 'dogs' in the searchbox.

Why do dogs roll on dead animals?

Purely coincidental date on that thread!
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by ultimaThule on 17.12.13 10:59

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:
I agree that GM Is capable of making split second decisions wlbts but, in this particular instance, he would seek to evaluate the risk to that most precious of beings, namely himself, before carrying a dead body through the streets of Luz and it is, therefore, IMO not a course of action he would embark on with undue haste albeit that, once determined on such a plan, it's one he would carry out with relish.

Yes, I do agree with you here, but it's the 'evaluation of risk' where we differ.  To a narcissist, being on the national news for neglecting your small children and allowing one of them to die, with very possible hints of sedation, would be enough in my opinion to tip the scales towards self preservation.  Regardless of jail-time and ruined careers, this would be anathema to someone with narcissistic traits.  The other potential consequences can only have added to his decision.

What courses of action are there?

1) Wait for the police, tell the truth,

2) Conceal the body, don't tell the truth.

Outcomes of (1) are castigation in the media, and very possible legal consequences from a foreign police force.  Outcomes of (2) are possibility of being caught, which bring with it all the outcomes of (1).  But with (2) he could also get away with it scott free.

If somebody wants and likes to take risks, and cannot bear public castigation, course of action (2) makes more sense.

To those without moral scruple, self-preservation at any cost is their first  and foremost priorty, as well as being their bottom line, and they would have no qualms whatsoever at concealing a hundred bodies or blaming/implicating a hundred people if it offered opportunity to evade being bought to account for their crime(s).

Having made the obvious decision, there was no need for GM to rush into action.  Given that the police were uninvolved until a call was made to them, he was at leisure to work out the most expedient way of diverting attention from the true facts of the matter - with the help of his spouse and his friends - once it became necessary to announce the news of Madeleine's disappearance.  

In this respect, the only time constraint was that the mission had to be accomplished before the process of decomposition drew attention to a small body that was hidden in plain sight by being openly carried in public, or was hidden in a bag or in a buggy, during its journey to a temporary resting place.

Once this had been accomplished, the only remaining constraint was that the announcement be made some time before the impending flight back to the UK where the child's absence may have attracted unwecome attention.
avatar
ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 17.12.13 11:03

@ultimaThule wrote:
To those without moral scruple, self-preservation at any cost is their first  and foremost priorty, as well as being their bottom line, and they would have no qualms whatsoever at concealing a hundred bodies or blaming/implicating a hundred people if it offered opportunity to evade being bought to account for their crime(s).

Having made the obvious decision, there was no need for GM to rush into action.  Given that the police were uninvolved until a call was made to them, he was at leisure to work out the most expedient way of diverting attention from the true facts of the matter - with the help of his spouse and his friends - once it became necessary to announce the news of Madeleine's disappearance.  

In this respect, the only time constraint was that the mission had to be accomplished before the process of decomposition drew attention to a small body that was hidden in plain sight by being openly carried in public, or was hidden in a bag or in a buggy, during its journey to a temporary resting place.

Once this had been accomplished, the only remaining constraint was that the announcement be made some time before the impending flight back to the UK where the child's absence may have attracted unwecome attention.

You have departed from the facts here.  The general public were already involved when the scream was heard by the waiter J.R.Salcedas.  I've already quoted his statement.  There was no time at all.

Here it is again:

'At saying this, I saw the man. Who I knew later to be Madeleines father, running to the pool and to the childrens play area in the Tapas zone as if looking for someone. It immediately hit me that after talking to the older woman, that the little girl had not been found. I offered to alert the workers at the Milenium Restaurant and the man agreed. He then left again running to continue searching. I believe that this was between 21H30 and 22H00 but do not remember with certainty.

'I went to find Ze and Ricardo to give them the news and to get their help in searching for the missing girl. I saw the head of the Milenium Restaurant in the Tapas and asked him to telephone the restaurant.

'I ran out of the Tapas and noticed that some of the childcare works of the Mark Warner had begun to arrive. At the point I left the Tapas I heard a scream from a woman I did not know. I do not know who screamed, but I had never heard a similar cry. I cannot even describe it but thought it had come from the child's mother. I went to the reception with one of the child care workers whose name I do not remember. One of the employees looked to be organizing the searches and told us the name of the child.'

Really, the claim that Gerry could hide the body at his own leisure doesn't match the facts.

whatliesbehindthesofa

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by Curioser on 17.12.13 11:10

@tigger wrote:
@Curioser wrote:
@tigger wrote:

(snip)

The GNR dogs were interested in the car park. Iirc. Gerry wanted dogs the same night, At 2 am they were operational, they'd have picked up on cadaver scent in 5a , on Gerry and on the route. I think the false trail laid didn't work either.
Very bad for  someone who needs to be in control, you might almost call it a disaster....

The GNR dogs weren't cadaver dogs. They were given the pink blanket to sniff as being Madeleine's scent and they followed the scent they were given. Madeleine's scent would have been all through apartment 5A so there was no point getting the GNR dogs to look there. Eddie, the cadaver dog was not brought in until July.

But yes, a total disaster.

I know - have younever hada dog? They'dcertainly pick up cadaver odour, one of their favouritesit seems to me.
In fact the first two dogs weren't search and rescue, the were for crowd control. So otherwise ordinary dogswho'd have gone for that interesting scent no matter what. Imo
Besides, the point  is that  Gerry  wanted dogs  asap - it's all easily  found here withreferencesif you type 'dogs' in the searchbox.

They wouldn't have been used to track inside the apartment. It was full of scents of the many people who had been in there all night including Madeleine and the cleaning products they would have used to clean up. They gave the dog handlers the pink blanket. Who knows who that belonged to...

No offence to this excellent forum but I'd rather go back to the files than rely on my own not-professional experience with dogs:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm

6. At 00.40, given the complexity of the situation that seemed to surround the disappearance, the GNR post commander requested reinforcements from two sniffer dog teams from the Portimao territorial group to help in the searches, considering the possibility that the girl could have left the apartment on foot and could be somewhere not very far from the OC resort.

7. At 01.00 after the group commander had been briefed about the situation, telephone contact was made with an official from the Queluz GNR school, with the aim of their releasing search and rescue dog teams, seeing as these are specially trained to find missing persons, which is not the case with the Portimao sniffer dogs, which are essentially patrol dogs.

II Development of Action

2. At 02.00 they arrived at P da L and began searching with the Portimao sniffer dog teams, the terrain searches were extended until the morning with the dogs and officers on the scene, as well as the night guard and local people who volunteered to help in the searches that took place throughout the night.

3. During this nocturnal period, the searches took place along the entire perimeter of the OC, in the urban area, plots of land and the nearest buildings, the officers searching all the place where there was a possibility the child might be, this area being extended later to include all of the beach zone.

4. At 08.00 three officers with 4 search and rescue dogs from Queluz arrived at the scene, these dogs immediately began to operate.

16. Considering that the searches that had taken place with the help of the helicopter had not yielded any results, it was agreed to reinforce and extend the foot searches and reinforcement from the search and rescue dog team was requested, which arrived at P da L at 23.00 with 3 more sniffer teams for a total of six officers and eight specialised dogs.

17. During the nocturnal period, field searches were reduced, given the lack of visibility, searches were made by EPG officers with the search and rescue dogs which concentrated particularly on the urban area of P da L.

And this from the dog handlers:
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id258.html

Armando Augusto Morais

Occupation: GNR Officer

He has been a GNR officer since 1982. He currently works in the Portimao Territorial Group, working within the forensics service.

On 4th May he was called at about 01.15, he arrived at the OC at about 1.55, accompanied by the officer Laçao.

They presented themselves to Sergeant Duarte from the GNR Lagos post and were informed by him of the disappearance of a small girl from the resort. There were other GNR officers present at the scene, but he does not remember their names. There were also PJ officers present.

After having established exactly where the girl had disappeared from, he was given a piece of her clothing by one of his colleagues, whose name he does not remember.

From the door of the apartment, accompanied by his dog, he walked around the entire perimeter of the resort and revised the interior of several of the apartments.

Date: 2007-05-16

Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão

Occupation: GNR Officer

He has been a GNR officer since 1988. He holds the post of soldier and currently works in the Portimao Territorial Group, working within the forensics service.

On 4th May he was called at about 01h15 when he was asleep at home, requesting him to appear at the Lagos GNR post as a small girl had disappeared. After arriving at the GNR post with his colleagues Morais and two dogs (Numi and Kit), German Shepherd dogs, which made up the search team, they immediately left for P da L. They arrived at about 02h30.

When they arrived at the scene, they entered the McCanns' apartment by the front door, and entered the living room, where there were some PJ officers as well as the McCann couple. They just talked to some colleagues from the PJ and asked for a piece of clothing that Madeleine had worn or used recently. They were given a pink/orange blanket that the child had been covered with in her bed.

They began searching with the dogs from the main entrance to the apartment, having given the blanket to his dog Numi to smell and begin to search.

You're right in that they weren't specifically missing person dogs, but they had some training in tracking.  The missing person dogs arrived at 8.00am on the 4th. They didn't find anything either.

I agree that it's interesting that GM wanted dogs, if he did. Do you have a reference for that?

____________________
I have no direct knowledge of the case. I'm just reading the files. It's all speculation. Don't sue me!
avatar
Curioser

Posts : 166
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-05-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by ultimaThule on 17.12.13 11:13

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:
To those without moral scruple, self-preservation at any cost is their first  and foremost priorty, as well as being their bottom line, and they would have no qualms whatsoever at concealing a hundred bodies or blaming/implicating a hundred people if it offered opportunity to evade being bought to account for their crime(s).

Having made the obvious decision, there was no need for GM to rush into action.  Given that the police were uninvolved until a call was made to them, he was at leisure to work out the most expedient way of diverting attention from the true facts of the matter - with the help of his spouse and his friends - once it became necessary to announce the news of Madeleine's disappearance.  

In this respect, the only time constraint was that the mission had to be accomplished before the process of decomposition drew attention to a small body that was hidden in plain sight by being openly carried in public, or was hidden in a bag or in a buggy, during its journey to a temporary resting place.

Once this had been accomplished, the only remaining constraint was that the announcement be made some time before the impending flight back to the UK where the child's absence may have attracted unwecome attention.

You have departed from the facts here.  The general public were already involved when the scream was heard by the waiter J.R.Salcedas.  I've already quoted his statement.  There was no time at all.

Here it is again:

'At saying this, I saw the man. Who I knew later to be Madeleines father, running to the pool and to the childrens play area in the Tapas zone as if looking for someone. It immediately hit me that after talking to the older woman, that the little girl had not been found. I offered to alert the workers at the Milenium Restaurant and the man agreed. He then left again running to continue searching. I believe that this was between 21H30 and 22H00 but do not remember with certainty.

'I went to find Ze and Ricardo to give them the news and to get their help in searching for the missing girl. I saw the head of the Milenium Restaurant in the Tapas and asked him to telephone the restaurant.

'I ran out of the Tapas and noticed that some of the childcare works of the Mark Warner had begun to arrive. At the point I left the Tapas I heard a scream from a woman I did not know. I do not know who screamed, but I had never heard a similar cry. I cannot even describe it but thought it had come from the child's mother. I went to the reception with one of the child care workers whose name I do not remember. One of the employees looked to be organizing the searches and told us the name of the child.'

Really, the claim that Gerry could hide the body at his own leisure doesn't match the facts.

It would seem that you've fallen into the trap of giving credence to what the McCanns would have the world believe when the evidence points away from any 'discovery' being made after the Tapas 9 had gathered in the bar on the evening of 3 May 2007.
avatar
ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 17.12.13 11:20

@ultimaThule wrote:
It would seem that you've fallen into the trap of giving credence to what the McCanns would have the world believe when the evidence points away from any 'discovery' being made after the Tapas 9 had gathered in the bar on the evening of 3 May 2007.

If that's how you want to interpret the statements of independent witnesses, that's up to you. You've given no reference to this evidence you speak of. I've given references to back up my points.

Over to you. Where is this 'evidence' that points away from a discovery being made after the Tapas meal?

whatliesbehindthesofa

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by ultimaThule on 17.12.13 12:07

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:
It would seem that you've fallen into the trap of giving credence to what the McCanns would have the world believe when the evidence points away from any 'discovery' being made after the Tapas 9 had gathered in the bar on the evening of 3 May 2007.

If that's how you want to interpret the statements of independent witnesses, that's up to you.  You've given no reference to this evidence you speak of.  I've given references to back up my points.

Over to you.  Where is this 'evidence' that points away from a discovery being made after the Tapas meal?

Having come late to this particular forum, I'm still in the process of researching this case through the wealth of information contained in its historic threads and that available in the mccannfiles.  However, as yet, I have seen nothing to persuade me that this was a matter of  'shock/panic ... wasn't thinking straight... events became overwhelming ..' and other such codswallop which should more properly be left to hotshot lawyers to manufacture.

As it would seem you are yet to embark on a similar voyage of discovery, I suggest you start with 'The Truth of the Lie' and compare your theory with that of the lead detective who first investigated the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, after which you may see the statements you've referred to in a somewhat different light.
avatar
ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 17.12.13 12:17

@ultimaThule wrote:
Having come late to this particular forum, I'm still in the process of researching this case through the wealth of information contained in its historic threads and that available in the mccannfiles.  However, as yet, I have seen nothing to persuade me that this was a matter of  'shock/panic ... wasn't thinking straight... events became overwhelming ..' and other such codswallop which should more properly be left to hotshot lawyers to manufacture.

As it would seem you are yet to embark on a similar voyage of discovery, I suggest you start with 'The Truth of the Lie' and compare your theory with that of the lead detective who first investigated the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, after which you may see the statements you've referred to in a somewhat different light.

Bit of a patronising tone there, ultimaThule.  And insulting too.  My theory is 'codswallop' according to you.

I have read 'The Truth of the Lie'.  Have you?  My theory pretty much completely agrees with Amaral's.  You appear to have some bizarre cognitive dissonance going on there.  I'll leave others to make their mind up -  not as to whether my theory is correct, but as to whether it is basically the same as that of Amaral.

Seems a bit strange to need 'hotshot lawyers' to manufacture what is essentially the same theory as given by a man that the McCanns have sued for libel.

I've no further interest in these insults ultimaThule, which you are directing at me because I have a different opinion on the case.  Go ahead, get the last word in, I'm not going to be drawn further.

whatliesbehindthesofa

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: something nefarious

Post by bobbin on 17.12.13 12:20

@whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:
It would seem that you've fallen into the trap of giving credence to what the McCanns would have the world believe when the evidence points away from any 'discovery' being made after the Tapas 9 had gathered in the bar on the evening of 3 May 2007.

If that's how you want to interpret the statements of independent witnesses, that's up to you.  You've given no reference to this evidence you speak of.  I've given references to back up my points.

Over to you.  Where is this 'evidence' that points away from a discovery being made after the Tapas meal?

I think you failed to grasp ultimaThule's message.
UNTIL the cry went out and subsequently then, the police would certainly be called, by someone/anyone, no-one would have been the wiser if Maddie had died on 3rd whilst her parents were at dinner.
But Gerry and Kate were the ones to let the 'cry' out re abduction, and start the whole ball rolling.
So we are facing two options.
1. Gerry genuinely believes Maddie has been abducted and goes into a panic, draws attention to the crisis, calls the newspapers, the police, anyone, everyone.
or
2. Gerry, being the calculating person he has shown himself to be, knows Maddie has 'died' previously, but to cover his and Kate's hides (or maybe even someone else's) rolls out a plan.
The only time constraints were, the flight home, (if they wanted to delay, to stay on in Portugal) and the grabbing of newspaper headlines for the Friday, before the departure Saturday.
I do not believe for one second that Gerry carried a 'dead' body. No trace was found on him at all, even if all of his trousers, shirts etc. had been washed many times from the Thursday 10 p.m. Smith sighting and the arrival of the dogs, since Kate's clothes and other things, including cuddle cat who had been washed, did signal to the cadavour dogs.
Now before the 'news' could be 'corrected' Philomena went blabbing about Jimmied window/shutters, as did Gerry, her own brother, there on the scene.
She can only have got that from her brother if he had contacted her after the discovery of the 'abduction'.
But he knew the windows etc. had not been jimmied. He was there and could see it, as could everyone else.
But, if the 'plan' had been to jimmy the shutters and Philomena already had her time slot (a bit like the Reuters statement that the 'Twin Towers' building no 7 has gone down'  20 minutes before it actually did, and in full view of Millions of people, worldwide) then it would indicate a 'plan' had been 'planned' but had hit some snags.
This then convinces me that a 'death' on the eve of the 3rd is most unlikely.
A problem would have occurred some time earlier on in the week.
It had necessitated, and resulted in, using deliberate techniques and materials to 'remove or damage beyond forensic analysis' any blood spots etc.
This was done for the most part, meticulously.
The only problem was being unable to 'jimmy' the floor tiles up, without it becoming apparent, to get at blood which had leaked into the grouting.
The removal of toothbrushes, not being able or willing to supply the clothes worn by Maddie that day, the lack of forensic evidence of her having been present in the apartment / no hairs / fingerprints /saliva etc., indicates one 'serious' clean up and this would have taken a great deal of time and meticulous inspection, because one single drop remaining, when All of the rest would have been removed, would still be enough to raise suspicion and draw attention to the deliberately bleached, or whatever, marks were picked up by luminol etc.
Given that I am convinced that something happened earlier on, then any possibility for removal is up for grabs. Car, involved person, buggy, burial, freezer, the choice is open.
IF however, NO plan had been envisaged, and IF Madeleine had 'died' in the apartment on the eve of the 3rd, and IF Gerry and Kate had feared for their jobs and keeping the twins, they did not need to 'cry out' and attract attention.
They could have discovered her next morning, a terrible tragedy, when the parents might have thought the child was just peacefully asleep when they checked briefly the night before, for not wanting to disturb the other children.
So why wasn't this the scenario ?
Now that's the reason two police forces, and the world at large are still looking at this affair.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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