The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm 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 your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Page 1 of 4 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by whmon on 11.03.14 23:40

There was a real life crime (murder) documentary on TV a couple of weeks ago. I can't tell you who it was about or even what country the murder was committed in, only that it wasn't in the UK. I don't know the details because I was barely watching it as I was busy on the pc. One thing I did catch though, was that the murderer was originally considered by all to be innocent and was not a suspect. The detective who solved the case had an interesting strategy. He looked at all the evidence that indicated the individual was innocent and did not rest until he had investigated the 'innocence' from every angle and found the fly in the ointment. He questioned every single thing that the individual had said and done, however small, and accepted nothing as true. In fact, the smaller details were his main focus.

I don't know if we should start asking questions about accepted facts prior to the holiday, or from the start of the holiday itself. The first evidence of the holiday would be the video of MBM tripping on the plane steps (I think), then the video of GM not being there to f**king enjoy himself. I don't suppose it is necessary to look at things in order though.

What is it that we have accepted as true in the McCann case that we could perhaps look at again? Many 'truths' have already been scrutinised on this and other forums. Are there any other 'truths' (however small) that we have overlooked?

____________________
This message is confidential and the information must not be used, disclosed, or copied to any other person who is not entitled to receive it. If you have received this message in error please notify the sender and then delete it.
avatar
whmon

Posts : 434
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-04-04
Location : Back of Beyond

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on 12.03.14 0:07

whmon My hope is this is exactly what the Portuguese are currently doing by slowly going through each piece of information with a fine tooth comb until they have cleared all other lines of enquiry and they are only left with the truth.


avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by jeanmonroe on 12.03.14 0:34

What is it that we have accepted as true in the McCann case?
---------------------------------------------------

Never to accept a word from the McCanns and friends mouths as 'true'?

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5815
Reputation : 1657
Join date : 2013-02-07

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by ultimaThule on 12.03.14 1:12

Stand every statement and assertion the McCanns and their 7 Tapas pals have made on its head and we may begin to see a faint outline of what could be something approaching the truth. 

As I understand it, Bellisa, that is exactly what NSY did for 2 years, after which Operation Grange's investigative review became a full on proactive investigation, and it's what the PJ were doing prior to re-opening their original investigation which was shelved in 2008.
avatar
ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2013-09-18

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Briohazard on 12.03.14 4:21

A lot. 

I started a topic asking the same thing not that long ago, and didn't get many bites. I'm glad you've reignited this because I think it warrants attention. 

I've accepted as true, for example, that Ella was sick. I haven't questioned what Tanner was doing prior to the alarm being raised. I haven't scrutinised the possibility that Tanner may have seen 'tannerman' for her own benefit.

I there's a lot that has been accepted without question. 

For me, the only evidence that is bulletproof is the dogs, phone pings, car contract and Parisio secure cameras. The rest.... The rest is open to nitpicking.

____________________
Once is a mistake. Twice, a choice. Three times, a conscious decision
avatar
Briohazard

Posts : 97
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-10-24
Age : 34
Location : South Australia

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by tigger on 12.03.14 7:52

Recently I've come to believe the Tapas booking sheets are so much waste paper.
They may have been there a couple of times, but there was no block booking, certainly no note at reception stating that all children were left alone.

Imo MW was fully complicit in adjusting the facts to fit the fiction.


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

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 47
Join date : 2011-07-20

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by frost on 12.03.14 8:14

About the only thing I believe to be true about this whole charade is Mrs Fenns  account of hearing a child crying and believing that the crying came from the mccanns apartment.

Everything the mccanns and their friends have stated I take with a pinch of salt

frost

Posts : 210
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-02-26

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on 12.03.14 10:01

Yeah ultimathule I hope this is the case,it just seems to be taking a long time,but they have got mountains of false information to follow up on.

Tigger I also think mw has to be complicit in.some way, cannot understand their reasoning behind shipping staff out so quickly,their loyalty to one family over all their other guests and the media intrusion that was welcomed by the mcs. Plus I believe they were aware of post 'abduction' forged creche sheets etc.

But the only things I believe are true is Madeleine went missing and dogs don't lie and clearly others have lied from day one and nothing they say can be taken as the truth.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by whmon on 12.03.14 11:51

I have always accepted as true that KM dragged her feet about going on the holiday. Maybe this is not true and she only wanted the world to think this? If something had been pre-planned then her stating she had reservations about going in the first place would have served as an alibi for her. Example: A group of children going into a shop with the intentions of stealing sweets and after it was discovered that sweets were missing one saying 'I didn't want to go to the shop in the first place therefore it couldn't have been my idea to steal those sweeties'.

This brings me to a second point. I had always accepted as true that both parents had equal knowledge of events but did they? The footage of GM saying he was not there to f**king enjoy himself makes me wonder if it was actually HIM and not her who didn't want to go in the first place. Also, who on earth would put that footage on the internet? Was it someone who wanted to incriminate him/take the focus away from somebody else/?

Would it be easier to lie convincingly if ones partner was in the dark about events, could one simply imitate the innocent partners reactions to appear guiltless? For example: GM prostrating himself on the bed and wailing closely followed by KM doing exactly the same thing.

Obviously, I am not stating this as my opinion but only as a matter for discussion.

____________________
This message is confidential and the information must not be used, disclosed, or copied to any other person who is not entitled to receive it. If you have received this message in error please notify the sender and then delete it.
avatar
whmon

Posts : 434
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-04-04
Location : Back of Beyond

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on 12.03.14 12:08

whmon wrote:I have always accepted as true that KM dragged her feet about going on the holiday. Maybe this is not true and she only wanted the world to think this? If something had been pre-planned then her stating she had reservations about going in the first place would have served as an alibi for her. Example: A group of children going into a shop with the intentions of stealing sweets and after it was discovered that sweets were missing one saying 'I didn't want to go to the shop in the first place therefore it couldn't have been my idea to steal those sweeties'.

This brings me to a second point. I had always accepted as true that both parents had equal knowledge of events but did they? The footage of GM saying he was not there to f**king enjoy himself makes me wonder if it was actually HIM and not her who didn't want to go in the first place. Also, who on earth would put that footage on the internet? Was it someone who wanted to incriminate him/take the focus away from somebody else/?

Would it be easier to lie convincingly if ones partner was in the dark about events, could one simply imitate the innocent partners reactions to appear guiltless? For example: GM prostrating himself on the bed and wailing closely followed by KM doing exactly the same thing.

Obviously, I am not stating this as my opinion but only as a matter for discussion.

How far in advance was the holiday booked? Amazingly I don't seem to be able to track down this apparently simple piece of information.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by tigger on 12.03.14 12:13

January I believe although how and to whom it was paid isn't clear, allegedly they paid DP iirc.

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

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 47
Join date : 2011-07-20

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on 12.03.14 12:15

I'd guess that he paid for the whole group by credit card and then the others reimbursed him for their share.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on 12.03.14 12:15

tigger wrote:January I believe although how and to whom it was paid isn't clear, allegedly they paid DP iirc.

Thanks Tigger. I wonder if this apparent reluctance on Kate's part was expressed at the time or triggered by something that happened in between.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by HelenMeg on 12.03.14 12:17

tigger wrote:Recently I've come to believe the Tapas booking sheets are so much waste paper.
They may have been there a couple of times, but there was no block booking, certainly no note at reception stating that all children were left alone.

Imo MW was fully complicit in adjusting the facts to fit the fiction.

Yes I would agree that the Ocean Club have played  large part in the cover up of what happened.
This leads me to suspect that they had something to hide.

If the Mc Canns were on their own in this, they would have eventually slunk into the background happy that they had got away with the concealment of death. Only because they have had high level assistance in this cover up have they been able to continue their presence in the limelight over recent years. They have seemed quite comfortable in their knowledge that they are protected.

There are only certain things we can take as fact - such as the dogs, Paraiso CCTV  etc
I think this is far more simple that many of us imagine - the more simple we keep it the nearer the truth we will get - IMO.

HelenMeg

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

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by sharonl on 12.03.14 17:05

"Madeleine disappeared from her from bed on May 3rd 2007"

Really?  Why are people still looking at the timeline and accepting as fact that May 3rd is the crucial day?  Apart from a few red herrings, there is no credible evidence to suggest that Madeleine was around after April 29th.



"Whilst her parents ate at a tapas bar 100 or metres away"

Really?  According to the Portuguese police, the children may have been cared for in one apartment, in addition to this, one member of the tapas group was missing from the table each night. 

IMO, the McCanns who take responsibility for nothing, were far too quick to claim that the children had been left home alone, but without that line, it would have been almost impossible to claim that Madeleine had been abducted.

I would prefer to go along with the thoughts of the PJ and suggest that the children were being cared for in one apartment.  After all, if the tapas 9 had already lost one child in the group they are hardly likely to go out leaving any of the others home alone risking further problems.
This may also explain why there was no trace of Madeleine in apt 5a

____________________
"WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER" - Rebekah Brooks to David Cameron
avatar
sharonl


Posts : 4080
Reputation : 715
Join date : 2009-12-29

http://www.cold2012.org.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by tigger on 12.03.14 17:32

sharonl wrote:"Madeleine disappeared from her from bed on May 3rd 2007"

Really?  Why are people still looking at the timeline and accepting as fact that May 3rd is the crucial day?  Apart from a few red herrings, there is no credible evidence to suggest that Madeleine was around after April 29th.



"Whilst her parents ate at a tapas bar 100 or metres away"

Really?  According to the Portuguese police, the children may have been cared for in one apartment, in addition to this, one member of the tapas group was missing from the table each night. 

IMO, the McCanns who take responsibility for nothing, were far too quick to claim that the children had been left home alone, but without that line, it would have been almost impossible to claim that Madeleine had been abducted.

I would prefer to go along with the thoughts of the PJ and suggest that the children were being cared for in one apartment.  After all, if the tapas 9 had already lost one child in the group they are hardly likely to go out leaving any of the others home alone risking further problems.
This may also explain why there was no trace of Madeleine in apt 5a

Clarence had a go at that - he said it would be much harder to get seven children to sleep. Now how many children were there including Maddie?

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

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 47
Join date : 2011-07-20

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by sharonl on 12.03.14 19:02

tigger wrote:
sharonl wrote:"Madeleine disappeared from her from bed on May 3rd 2007"

Really?  Why are people still looking at the timeline and accepting as fact that May 3rd is the crucial day?  Apart from a few red herrings, there is no credible evidence to suggest that Madeleine was around after April 29th.



"Whilst her parents ate at a tapas bar 100 or metres away"

Really?  According to the Portuguese police, the children may have been cared for in one apartment, in addition to this, one member of the tapas group was missing from the table each night. 

IMO, the McCanns who take responsibility for nothing, were far too quick to claim that the children had been left home alone, but without that line, it would have been almost impossible to claim that Madeleine had been abducted.

I would prefer to go along with the thoughts of the PJ and suggest that the children were being cared for in one apartment.  After all, if the tapas 9 had already lost one child in the group they are hardly likely to go out leaving any of the others home alone risking further problems.
This may also explain why there was no trace of Madeleine in apt 5a

Clarence had a go at that - he said it would be much harder to get seven children to sleep. Now how many children were there including Maddie?

So how did they get them to sleep? I think we know the answer to that one.

You could always rely on Clarrie to put his foot right in it.

You would expect someone in his position to be more professional and to have respect for the Portuguese police, not to discredit them just because the suspects in the case demand it.






____________________
"WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER" - Rebekah Brooks to David Cameron
avatar
sharonl


Posts : 4080
Reputation : 715
Join date : 2009-12-29

http://www.cold2012.org.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by ultimaThule on 12.03.14 22:25

The fact that the McCanns and Mitchell went to extraordinary lengths to trash the Portuguese police serves to further convince me that there was no 'high level assistance' and that the only cover up was theirs, manufactured by them in typically Gerry fashion - 'It's the Gerry touch' said Kate on p57 of the bewk.

If 'higher powers' had lent a hand, we would have heard nothing but praise for the PJ, the family would either have become ex-pats leading idyllic lives in Portugal or would have made a quiet return to Rothley Towers after a year,  the wee one would have been transformed into a man of gravitas jetting around the world to chair conferences on missing children, the world wouldn't begrudge his spouse any of those occasions when she was inappropriately wreathed in smiles so soon after the loss of her eldest daughter to a paedophile, and Operation Grange would not have come into being.
avatar
ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2013-09-18

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on 13.03.14 9:02

tigger wrote:
sharonl wrote:

I would prefer to go along with the thoughts of the PJ and suggest that the children were being cared for in one apartment.  After all, if the tapas 9 had already lost one child in the group they are hardly likely to go out leaving any of the others home alone risking further problems.
This may also explain why there was no trace of Madeleine in apt 5a

Clarence had a go at that - he said it would be much harder to get seven children to sleep. Now how many children were there including Maddie?
***
If my calculation is correct, there were eight children amongst them ...
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by PeterMac on 13.03.14 9:05

Châtelaine wrote:
tigger wrote:
sharonl wrote:

This may also explain why there was no trace of Madeleine in apt 5a

Clarence had a go at that - he said it would be much harder to get seven children to sleep. Now how many children were there including Maddie?
If my calculation is correct, there were eight children amongst them ...
Quite so, but only 7 to get to sleep ?

____________________

avatar
PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 171
Join date : 2010-12-06

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by tigger on 13.03.14 9:19

PeterMac wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
tigger wrote:
sharonl wrote:

This may also explain why there was no trace of Madeleine in apt 5a

Clarence had a go at that - he said it would be much harder to get seven children to sleep. Now how many children were there including Maddie?
If my calculation is correct, there were eight children amongst them ...
Quite so, but only 7 to get to sleep ?

Yes! I will try to find the exact quote  - a true Clarrified statement.

This is from Steel Magnolias - the link to the Evening Standard article is also interesting.

Paulo Rebelo arrived in England and the McCanns fled to Brussels !
Working on the thesis the children were not neglected but all together with an adult each evening, or at least seven of them , makes one question why Paulo Rebelo is reported to have said seven, and not eight. Information known only to the investigation.

One member of the group who babysat the children, taking it in turns as to who would be 'sick' that night , made it impossible for Madeleine to have been abducted !

Paulo Rebelo arrived in England and the McCanns fled the country. Mitchell said 'it is pure coincidence that the McCanns are leaving Britain during the week of the Police interviews'

The Police interviews and what a circus they turned out to be...

The McCanns had a devious plan to disrupt the investigation. This would be the moment a Spanish reporter Nacho Abad, revealed on live television that he had proof the PJ had leaked information from the McCanns files. The 'crying incident' had been born right in the middle of Paulo Rebelos interrogation of the tapas 7.

Nacho Abad, it will come as no surprise to learn, had good contacts with Metodo 3 and of course Clarence Mitchell.

The McCanns including the tapas 7 well aware that Rebelo knew their secret, they had all lied about neglecting their children. John Stalker's comment, the McCanns and their friends are hiding a big secret, well this was it.

Rebelo an unknown quantity , the McCanns no longer in control of the investigation, their fear must have been what if Rebelo repeats 'the children were all together'... to the media whilst in England , they would be finished.
Hence the' leaking' of information , once more pushing child neglect.


Rebelo would have realised at this point what he was up against, he packed his bags and returned to Portugal.

Only a confession will solve this crime.


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23478385-portuguese-police-accuse-mccanns-spokesman-clarence-mitchell-of-lying-through-his-teeth.do

Unquote


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

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 47
Join date : 2011-07-20

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on 13.03.14 9:30

PeterMac wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
tigger wrote:
sharonl wrote:

This may also explain why there was no trace of Madeleine in apt 5a

Clarence had a go at that - he said it would be much harder to get seven children to sleep. Now how many children were there including Maddie?
If my calculation is correct, there were eight children amongst them ...
Quite so, but only 7 to get to sleep ?
***
Interesting, isn't it?

ETA Great comment, Tigger. Hadn't seen this before. And hadn't read it yet, whilst being interrupted writing my above brief comment.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Guest on 13.03.14 9:38

tigger wrote:Rebelo would have realised at this point what he was up against, he packed his bags and returned to Portugal.

Only a confession will solve this crime.



Isn't that the danger inherent in a whitewash? That the truth will out - somehow - and SY will look as bad as the McCanns?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by Rasputin on 13.03.14 9:55

Daily EXPRESS front page: “Madeleine: Seven children were sleeping in McCann apartment, claim police”

Page 9: “Another amazing claim by the police: Other couples’ children were in Madeleine’s apartment”

It is a “bombshell”. It could “destroy the credibility of the group – now dubbed the Tapas Nine” –who say their own children were in their own family apartments

Clarence Mitchell says: “If you put seven children together, you’re going to have a far harder time getting them to sleep then three”

We await a re-enactment

Says a “high-ranking Policia Judicaria officer: “Unless we are dealing with a sexual predator who had been following this little girl for quite some time, which is not probable because they had only been in the Algarve for six days, it would be highly unlikely she [Madeleine] would be chosen. In crimes of this nature, the criminals always look for younger children because they are easier to sell”

And easier to get off to sleep, right?

DAILY MAIL page 25: “Madeleine ‘was left in room with six other youngsters’”

“It’s utter rubbish,” says Clarence Mitchell

Portuguese newspaper 24 Horas tells of “significant evidence” that seven of the Tapas Nine’s eight children had been in the McCanns’ apartment on May 3

____________________
"I'm not buying it" Wendy Murphy
avatar
Rasputin

Posts : 269
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-13

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we accept as true (that we should perhaps reconsider)?

Post by joyce1938 on 13.03.14 10:14

So are we thinking there should have been a lot more DNA of all the kids found in apartment
avatar
joyce1938

Posts : 843
Reputation : 112
Join date : 2010-04-20
Age : 78
Location : england

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 4 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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