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 as some of them are 'members only', 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!


But why?

View previous topic View next topic Go down

But why?

Post by hustling01 on 19.05.14 23:33

Why would all these people lie so much just for the mcanns? I cant see that so many people all saying ok mcanns i'll lie for you no probs i wont question you i'll say what you want me to, i cant see the reason.

hustling01

Posts : 10
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-05-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by aquila on 19.05.14 23:36

but why are you opening new threads again when it's been respectfully pointed out with a link for new members to ask questions?
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8792
Reputation : 1760
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by Guest on 20.05.14 7:09

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t8363-new-members-please-put-your-questions-on-this-thread?highlight=questions

I'll just say here that the question you ask Hustling01 is a valid one. It wasn't until 2009 that I became aware of all the things about this story that didn't add up. Before then I had the occasional doubt but then I thought - nobody would keep this pretence up for so long - including getting all their friends and relatives to go along with it - would they?

Now I say with personal certainty - yes, they would.

I do wonder if all concerned sometimes wish they'd been honest from the start - how bad could the truth be?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by Tony Bennett on 20.05.14 8:03

@aquila wrote:but why are you opening new threads again when it's been respectfully pointed out with a link for new members to ask questions?
aquila, I think the answer to that is quite clear from hustling01's first post:

 
even if they found maddie remains nothing would happen to the mcanns or other it would be put down to an unknown sex attacker. Maybe theres no big conspiracy theory maybe the police genuinely believe in an unknown sex attacker and thats what there fully focused on after the cleared the group. Like them or not theres no real evidence against them as the dogs are NOT 100% reliable like you think they are.

____________________

The amazing symbiosis between bees and flowers:

https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/god-created-plant-pollinator-partners/  

avatar
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 14901
Reputation : 2996
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by Woofer on 20.05.14 8:35

@hustling01 wrote:Why would all these people lie so much just for the mcanns? I cant see that so many people all saying ok mcanns i'll lie for you no probs i wont question you i'll say what you want me to, i cant see the reason.

Imagine you had a grown up son, maybe the youngest, who had a wife he loved and lovely children.  Imagine he and his wife were upwardly mobile and doing well.  Imagine, you know his wife has found it difficult to cope with having 3 children so close together - you have helped when possible.  Imagine the eldest child can be difficult at times and imagine you`ve been told that your son`s wife cracked under the pressure whilst on holiday and lost her temper and something terrible happened.  How do you feel and what would you do for your son?

This is just an imaginary scenario of course, but it gives an insight into how close relatives would react.
avatar
Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by woodforthetrees on 20.05.14 9:25

Looks like hustling01 is from camp McCann as all posts i have seen point to that. Anyway...

I have to admit, i am yet to be 100% convinced. So far, i'm 90% convinced of the McCanns involvement in the concealment. My only hope is that shallow digs (wherever they may actually be taking place) turn up items which hold vital DNA evidence..... or not, to either point to a 3rd party purpotrator, or eliminate anyone else by only having Gerrys DNA on the items.

My only doubt is the lack of DNA on Gerrys clothes, or the whereabouts of the clothes and sports bag. I think if those items are found, it would answer a lot of questions

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by Guest on 20.05.14 9:30

@woodforthetrees wrote:Looks like hustling01 is from camp McCann as all posts i have seen point to that. Anyway...

I have to admit, i am yet to be 100% convinced. So far, i'm 90% convinced of the McCanns involvement in the concealment. My only hope is that shallow digs (wherever they may actually be taking place) turn up items which hold vital DNA evidence..... or not, to either point to a 3rd party purpotrator, or eliminate anyone else by only having Gerrys DNA on the items.

My only doubt is the lack of DNA on Gerrys clothes, or the whereabouts of the clothes and sports bag. I think if those items are found, it would answer a lot of questions

I don't believe GM's clothes were tested for DNA, but in your opinion who's DNA would they be tested for if they had been?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by Guest on 20.05.14 9:48

I always like to give posters the benefit of the doubt even when they appear to have an ulterior motive for being here.

It may be a genuine case of being unaware of the facts of the case which don't get widely reported.

If it isn't, well at least I tried!
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by woodforthetrees on 20.05.14 13:25

Hi dantezebu

I was meaning that say for example they find a bag...which contains DNA from the McCanns, plus Madeleine, then that links the parents to that bag This is great, however.... as it is their own bag anyway, a lawyer can dismiss any suspicion against them based on that fact (as they did with cuddle cat, clothing etc etc)

However, if there are no traces of anybody else’s DNA on a buried/hidden bag, whether blood, sweat, skin, from e.g the reported 'abductor' then it begs the question... "Why is only Gerrys DNA on a concealed bag and nobody else’s??"

It would insinuate that nobody else was involved in the disposal of artefacts associated with the case and thus point the finger of suspicion straight back at the parents, not to mention confirmation of poor Madeleine’s demise if cadaver scent is picked up too.

This would mean a fundamental shift of focus, to a unified approach to the investigation.

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by lj on 20.05.14 14:08

But why do you keep opening threads, while you have been told to put them on the newbie thread?

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/
avatar
lj

Posts : 3327
Reputation : 200
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by whatliesbehindthesofa on 20.05.14 14:33

Why also don't you ever reply to anybody on these threads? Any reason for the 'hit and run'?

whatliesbehindthesofa

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by Snifferdog on 20.05.14 15:03

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@aquila wrote:but why are you opening new threads again when it's been respectfully pointed out with a link for new members to ask questions?
aquila, I think the answer to that is quite clear from hustling01's first post:

 
even if they found maddie remains nothing would happen to the mcanns or other it would be put down to an unknown sex attacker. Maybe theres no big conspiracy theory maybe the police genuinely believe in an unknown sex attacker and thats what there fully focused on after the cleared the group. Like them or not theres no real evidence against them as the dogs are NOT 100% reliable like you think they are.

Hustling01 I find it interesting that you use the words sex attacker twice. Why so?

____________________
“‘Conspiracy stuff’ is now shorthand for unspeakable truth.”
– Gore Vidal
avatar
Snifferdog

Posts : 1008
Reputation : 16
Join date : 2012-05-11
Location : here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by Guest on 20.05.14 15:58

The use of those words doesn't seem particularly odd to me as the McCanns have always been anxious to shout the paedophile angle from the rooftops; not of course that they think he (or even she) will be treating their daughter badly.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by Guest on 20.05.14 16:40

@woodforthetrees wrote:Hi dantezebu

I was meaning that say for example they find a bag...which contains DNA from the McCanns, plus Madeleine, then that links the parents to that bag This is great, however.... as it is their own bag anyway, a lawyer can dismiss any suspicion against them based on that fact (as they did with cuddle cat, clothing etc etc)

However, if there are no traces of anybody else’s DNA on a buried/hidden bag, whether blood, sweat, skin, from e.g the reported 'abductor' then it begs the question... "Why is only Gerrys DNA on a concealed bag and nobody else’s??"

It would insinuate that nobody else was involved in the disposal of artefacts associated with the case and thus point the finger of suspicion straight back at the parents, not to mention confirmation of poor Madeleine’s demise if cadaver scent is picked up too.

This would mean a fundamental shift of focus, to a unified approach to the investigation.

Hi WFTT, I understand your reasoning but unfortunately I don't think the absence of DNA should they find any artefacts will cause any shift of focus.
It didn't in the apartment.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: But why?

Post by woodforthetrees on 21.05.14 9:13

Hi dantezebu

It did shift the focus, the parents became suspects. However, because it was the McCanns accomodation, proving anything would be extremely difficult as their DNA would be everywhere.

The point being, if there had been some kind of concealment of articles outside of their 'comfort zone' so to speak, it becomes harder for them to talk their way out of it (with fund financed lawyers).

Maybe i'm just being hopeful, who knows.

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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