Re: Digging to start next week - UPDATE... starting today 2/6/14

by aiyoyo 30.05.14 15:29

PeterMac wrote:Perhaps we are misunderstanding what is going on.

Perhaps they are searching for something more intangible,
Forensic traces of decency
Some last threads of conscience
A tiny particle of dignity, or failing that, of virtue,

They may be using the latest GPC - a ground penetrating conscience detector
looking for any last remnant of moral sense or standards,
a clue to any values and principles once held
any remains of ethics and beliefs;
and any relics of compunction, scruples, or qualms.

Good one !

But, what about the dogs ?

by jeanmonroe 30.05.14 16:12

aiyoyo wrote:
PeterMac wrote:Perhaps we are misunderstanding what is going on.

Perhaps they are searching for something more intangible,
Forensic traces of decency
Some last threads of conscience
A tiny particle of dignity, or failing that, of virtue,

They may be using the latest GPC - a ground penetrating conscience detector
looking for any last remnant of moral sense or standards,
a clue to any values and principles once held
any remains of ethics and beliefs;
and any relics of compunction, scruples, or qualms.

Good one !

But, what about the dogs ?

Unfortunately, FP, RO, JT and KM, the people who SAY they would do ANYTHING to get Madeleine 'back', WON'T be going to PDL next week, Sandra!

by **PeterMac** 30.05.14 16:24

jeanmonroe wrote:
Unfortunately, FP, RO, JT and KM, the people who SAY they would do ANYTHING to get Madeleine 'back', WON'T be going to PDL next week, Sandra!

No Lawyer would let them.

by Lance De Boils 30.05.14 16:47

The bit of land I referred to as having been dug up can be seen in the aerial map PM posted. It's immediately next to the cemetery (North.) Could you do a zoomed in one for us please, PM?

In the photograph views and Street view, it hasn't been dug over, but on the satellite map it has.

I'm just wondering when it was dug over.

by jeanmonroe 30.05.14 17:01

GA:

Q - What is your opinion?

A - To me, Gerry hid Madeleine's body on the beach. And after a few days he moved her with his car. We work following this lead. Trying to find out the date of the switch, some details, but we were on the way. The Irish was about to arrive in Portugal, but everything was delayed too much, he even received external pressures. In the end, he didn't testify for the Police.
------------------------------------------------------

So, IF GM 'moved' the 'body' after a few days, WTF are the taxpayer funded Met actually 'looking/digging' for, or EXPECT to 'find'?

'REPLICA' Maddie pj's, like the ones the McCanns had in their possession and 'displayed' at press conferences AFTER Madeleine had been 'missing' for weeks, anyone?

There's NOTHING there is there, IF GM had 'removed' her from the beach area, after a few days?

BUT 'something' MIGHT be there NOW, put there by 'someone' who visited PDL 'on the quiet' these 3 years Operation Grange has been 'active'

And why are the taxpayer funded Met NOW 'convinced' by what the Irish family have 'said/seen' when the Irish family 'recieved EXTERNAL pressures'?

EXTERNAL 'pressures' received from WHOM, WHERE and WHEN?

It used to be called 'witness nobbling' if indeed that is what did occur!

And the Irish family DIDN'T testify for the Police.

Now there's a surprise.............NOT!

by margaret 30.05.14 18:38

Pershing36 wrote:

This all brings back memories of the Ben Needham case when the police traveled to Kos and randomly started excavating a field. Unsurprisingly they found nothing and I believe it was done for show to make it look like they were doing something rather than it being based on some viable lead.

How can you write something as fact when you don't know what you're talking about? The field wasn't 'randomly excavated' it was next to Bens grandparents house where he disappeared from and it was having building work done at the time. It had to be ruled out.

I suppose in the times of austerity you think SY police just fancied a jolly in the sun?

The British team, led by Detective Superintendent Matt Fenwick, of South Yorkshire Police, is understood to be about 18-strong and includes dog teams and a forensic archaeologist.
Their search will focus on the grassed mound which is near a farmhouse next to the one Ben's grandparents were renovating in 1991 and where the youngster was last seen.
One theory is that it is building material which was dumped at the time the toddler went missing and the youngster could have been accidentally buried beneath it.

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

by Guest 30.05.14 18:44

@ margaret

and didn't his mother say "If they find his bones my life is ended" or words equally moving and understandable.

by margaret 30.05.14 18:56

daffodil wrote:@ margaret

and didn't his mother say "If they find his bones my life is ended" or words equally moving and understandable.

Yes, and both his parents went out there to be there while it was done. Poor couple.

Contrast their actions and words with the Mccanns who don't wish to be anywhere near in case evidence is found.....

by **Tony Bennett** 30.05.14 19:15

MarleneP wrote:You could see it like this:

1 SY believes Smith family. The children do not lie, they saw a man with a child. There was a Smithman and it could be Gerry.

2 There is the smell of corpses in the apartment = the child died hours before disappearance

3 The man with a child did not have time in the evening to dig a hole. So grave was earlier (afternoon?) Excavated.

In which case:

(1) all the stories about Madeleine being seen alive at 2.29pm (Last Photo), 5.30pm (High Tea), 6.30pm (David Payne), 7.00-8.30pm (McCanns) and 9.10pm (Gerry's check) would be wholly false

(2) rigor mortis might have set in to the child's body, and

(3) a man would have been running a fantastic risk carrying a dead body, probably stiff by now, for several minutes through the streets of Praia da Luz.

I can't see that scenario being realistic, nor do I think it's Redwood's latest sham theory

by NickE 30.05.14 20:25

[color:e03f=000000]A trail of her scent picked up by police dogs at the flat was followed to Batista supermarket just 400 yards away where it disappeared'.

"The Chief of the GNR Search and Rescue Team, who coordinated all the work carried out by the two sniffer dogs, states that the dogs took the same route on both 04 May 2007 and 08 May 2007 - i.e. around the apartments and into the nearby car park, where the trail was lost".

My personal theory is that there is a "Smithman" but the girl was not Madeleine.
"Smithman" was a smokescreen for a fake kidnapping.
Is there any independent witness who saw what baby J Wilkins had in his buggy?
"The Smithman baby" maybe?
I think there was a car parked by the Batista supermarket and this was probably earlier on Thursday or Wednesday.

by **PeterMac** 30.05.14 21:51

aiyoyo wrote:
PeterMac wrote:Perhaps we are misunderstanding what is going on.

Perhaps they are searching for something more intangible,
Forensic traces of decency
Some last threads of conscience
A tiny particle of dignity, or failing that, of virtue,

They may be using the latest GPC - a ground penetrating conscience detector
looking for any last remnant of moral sense or standards,
a clue to any values and principles once held
any remains of ethics and beliefs;
and any relics of compunction, scruples, or qualms.

Good one !
But, what about the dogs ?

Or perhaps they are looking for the Blue tennis bag Gerry did not have, except in the PJ photographs, containing the pink blanket which went missing, and then Kate on Oprah hoped the abductor would give to Madeleine, which was also photographed on the bed.
Almost as bizarre as the pyjamas she was wearing when she went missing, which they showed the world some weeks later.
Perhaps one of the many pairs will be there as well. (The ones with the washed T stain, or the ones she was wearing, or the ones they demonstrated)

For newbies, - Dr Amaral took the view that the red blanket might have been used as a Shroud for the final interment or disposal.
As a fellow RC he would understand the importance of a small ritual like this.
And this would explain why it went missing some time after the original events.

Entirely consistent with some purported theories, and consistent with grief stricken parents who have lost a child - in the sense of lost to death - and are trying to make personal amends with what remains of their consciences.

So the dogs will be looking for what they always do so well. Human cadaverine and human blood, either from a body directly, or traces on material.

by TheTruthWillOut 30.05.14 22:00

Bottom line is if anything is found that belongs to the McCann's/Tapas 7, they got some 'splaining to do.

They wouldn't be able to say a abductor took any items now as they are on record that the only thing missing is Madeleine, I believe?

by Guest 30.05.14 22:02

Oh yes, Peter, the pink blanket. Another of those Freudian slips ...

by jeanmonroe 31.05.14 2:00

So, if the new 'better' UK cadaver and blood dogs, 'find' something related to Madeleine, the $64,000 question will be.................will G&KM be screaming from the roof tops about how 'notoriously unreliable' the dogs are OR be praising the 'reliability' of the dogs for 'finding' something, related to their daughter, that might ultimately lead to the 'solving' of the mystery surrounding their daughter's 'disappearance'?

by Naz_Nomad 31.05.14 2:10

jeanmonroe wrote:So, if the new 'better' UK cadaver and blood dogs, 'find' something related to Madeleine, the $64,000 question will be.................will G&KM be screaming from the roof tops about how 'notoriously unreliable' the dogs are OR be praising the 'reliability' of the dogs for 'finding' something, related to their daughter, that might ultimately lead to the 'solving' of the mystery surrounding their daughter's 'disappearance'?

by 1soapy 31.05.14 2:35

Just wanted to say that I thought the, 'for newbies' (see PM above) addition is something experienced posters could do a lot more of, for the benefit of others and would be appreciated and get newer readers more interested and up to speed quicker. It's really helpful and can save time in the long run (i.e. avoid folk asking the obvious or repeated stuff, previously dealt with and requiring a response). It requires an extra sentence or two of effort. Optionally, a link or reference or clue to where more detail can be found, could be added, 'if you get time' or done by other members, e.g. if someone raises such an issue. There are of course lots of threads and sections, but they can take time to locate.

Thanks.

by missbeetle 31.05.14 7:30

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

This is a screenshot of 48 Hours Where's Maddie programme.

The chaps are Portuguese investigators looking at a computer simulation of the Ocean Club layout.

by Carrry On Doctor 31.05.14 7:31

1soapy wrote:Just wanted to say that I thought the, 'for newbies' (see PM above) addition is something experienced posters could do a lot more of, for the benefit of others and would be appreciated and get newer readers more interested and up to speed quicker. It's really helpful and can save time in the long run (i.e. avoid folk asking the obvious or repeated stuff, previously dealt with and requiring a response). It requires an extra sentence or two of effort. Optionally, a link or reference or clue to where more detail can be found, could be added, 'if you get time' or done by other members, e.g. if someone raises such an issue. There are of course lots of threads and sections, but they can take time to locate.

Thanks.

Totally agree. PM's post is refreshing both for newbies and veterans. I think sometimes we get sidetracked too often, so this post (and coming from such a respected and credible author) is a welcome shot in the arm for everyone.

I would expect (hope !) that public interest will step up again soon and posts like this benefit us all.

More please Peter !!

by **PeterMac** 31.05.14 7:35

Tony Bennett wrote:
MarleneP wrote:You could see it like this:

1 SY believes Smith family. The children do not lie, they saw a man with a child. There was a Smithman and it could be Gerry.
2 There is the smell of corpses in the apartment = the child died hours before disappearance
3 [b]The man with a child did not have time in the evening to dig a hole. So grave was earlier (afternoon?) Excavated.
In which case:

(1) all the stories about Madeleine being seen alive at 2.29pm (Last Photo), 5.30pm (High Tea), 6.30pm (David Payne), 7.00-8.30pm (McCanns) and 9.10pm (Gerry's check) would be wholly false
(2) rigor mortis might have set in to the child's body, and
(3) a man would have been running a fantastic risk carrying a dead body, probably stiff by now, for several minutes through the streets of Praia da Luz.

I can't see that scenario being realistic, nor do I think it's Redwood's latest sham theory

Agreed.
He may be many things, but a total idiot, ? Probably not

by noddy100 31.05.14 8:01

So is there doubt over the pink blanket
I thought it was on the bed with the soft you?
Did KM say on Oprah it was gone?
Sorry for questions I haven't seen Oprah yet

by **PeterMac** 31.05.14 8:18

noddy100 wrote:So is there doubt over the pink blanket
I thought it was on the bed with the soft you?
Did KM say on Oprah it was gone?
Sorry for questions I haven't seen Oprah yet

The Blue bag - shown clearly on the PJ photo in the wardrobe, exactly where the dog later alerted
went missing, and then Mitchell Denied there had ever BEEN a blue tennis bag.
The pink blanket is clearly shown on the PJ photo, is referred to in Exhibit KH1 as being one of the key pieces of "evidence" to prove an abduction (! ! ? ? )
and then disappears and is not available for inspection at the time the dogs come round to do their unreliable and useless searching.
Dr Amaral clocked this very quickly, and started t think about the implications.

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

Maddie's blanket brings in a new lead Correio da Manhã

Kate says that the blanket was taken by the abductors, but the PJ took a photograph of it. Then it disappeared.

By: Henrique Machado/Magali Pinto
17 December 2010
Thanks to Montclair for translation

When Kate was interviewed on 26 April last year on the Oprah Winfrey show, she made an appeal: "I hope that the abductors cover her with her blanket." The mother of Maddie, who disappeared in Praia da Luz in 2007, was referring to the pink blanket which 4-year-old Maddie slept with every night. This same blanket was photographed by the PJ on the day following the disappearance, but it was never seen again. "If the blanket was there the next day, how was it possible for the abductors to take it. It is also with this that I will try to get the case reopened," stated Gonçalo Amaral, ex-coordinator of the PJ in Portimão.

"There are many new facts that I will hand over to the Ministério Público and which I believe to be enough to get this case, which should never have been shelved, reopened. This is one more detail. We need to know which blanket was Kate talking about, because the pink one stayed in the apartment. Now it is missing."

by noddy100 31.05.14 8:45

I

PeterMac wrote:
noddy100 wrote:So is there doubt over the pink blanket
I thought it was on the bed with the soft you?
Did KM say on Oprah it was gone?
Sorry for questions I haven't seen Oprah yet

The Blue bag - shown clearly on the PJ photo in the wardrobe, exactly where the dog later alerted
went missing, and then Mitchell Denied there had ever BEEN a blue tennis bag.
The pink blanket is clearly shown on the PJ photo, is referred to in Exhibit KH1 as being one of the key pieces of "evidence" to prove an abduction (! ! ? ? )
and then disappears and is not available for inspection at the time the dogs come round to do their unreliable and useless searching.
Dr Amaral clocked this very quickly, and started t think about the implications.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Maddie's blanket brings in a new lead Correio da Manhã

Kate says that the blanket was taken by the abductors, but the PJ took a photograph of it. Then it disappeared.

By: Henrique Machado/Magali Pinto
17 December 2010
Thanks to Montclair for translation

When Kate was interviewed on 26 April last year on the Oprah Winfrey show, she made an appeal: "I hope that the abductors cover her with her blanket." The mother of Maddie, who disappeared in Praia da Luz in 2007, was referring to the pink blanket which 4-year-old Maddie slept with every night. This same blanket was photographed by the PJ on the day following the disappearance, but it was never seen again. "If the blanket was there the next day, how was it possible for the abductors to take it. It is also with this that I will try to get the case reopened," stated Gonçalo Amaral, ex-coordinator of the PJ in Portimão.

"There are many new facts that I will hand over to the Ministério Público and which I believe to be enough to get this case, which should never have been shelved, reopened. This is one more detail. We need to know which blanket was Kate talking about, because the pink one stayed in the apartment. Now it is missing."

Wow that's pure evidence right there
How come it wasn't used?
I meant soft toy as we'll not soft you!
Why has no one ever put KM in front of the Oprah interview with the pic of the blanket and questioned her
This just all gets weirder the more I read
Thanks for that reply full of information :)

by russiandoll 31.05.14 8:50

Will the dogs go into 5a this time around I wonder?

by Watching The Detectives 31.05.14 9:02

Was there only one interview with Oprah?

There is a transcript given here, which I have searched for the word blanket, but it does not seem to me that Kate mentions it directly in the way that is being discussed here.

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

Was there another interview?

by Woofer 31.05.14 10:22

Watching The Detectives wrote:Was there only one interview with Oprah?

There is a transcript given here, which I have searched for the word blanket, but it does not seem to me that Kate mentions it directly in the way that is being discussed here.

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

Was there another interview?

It was Oprah that referred to Kate having said it previously -

"
Oprah: Well I, you know, I'd read something that said there were times even you know early on after she err went missing that you would say I want I hope that whoever has her gives her her blanket I hope that whoever has her is keeping her warm I hope that whoever has her...

Kate: I mean it's funny, it's you know, I mean as a mum it's things like that you worry about as well you know. Is someone brushing her teeth. Is someone rubbing her tummy when she's not feeling well. You know, it's all those things as a mother you do and you should be doing and... "

by Watching The Detectives 31.05.14 10:33

Is there a link to a clip of Kate actually saying the things that Oprah is attributing to her?

There is an important difference between primary and secondary evidence.

by Mirage 31.05.14 11:09

Woofer wrote:
Kate: I mean it's funny, it's you know, I mean as a mum it's things like that (the blanket) you worry about as well you know. Is someone brushing her teeth. Is someone rubbing her tummy when she's not feeling well. You know, it's all those things as a mother you do and you should be doing and... "

---------------------------------------------------

Funny how the mind works. When frantically editing one anomaly, out slips another. Under pressure, heavily associated items cannot easily be separated. They share a synaptic line.

Here we have an association of ideas. A blanket. A toothbrush. The existence of both previously denied, despite the one having been photographed and the other, being any child's most basic accoutrement. Both missing for implausible reasons. But, in an unguarded moment, fleetingly re-united in an unconscious thought stream.

Much later will come the vow - not to return to Portugal unless DNA is discovered.

Did a tooth fairy come clean?

by Woofer 31.05.14 11:21

Watching The Detectives wrote:Is there a link to a clip of Kate actually saying the things that Oprah is attributing to her?

There is an important difference between primary and secondary evidence.

I don't know when it was said, but no doubt someone will provide a link. Its not something Oprah would have invented and it was not countered. But if you're acting in the role of attorney for the defence, you're correct, a primary clip is needed.

by **PeterMac** 31.05.14 11:38

One of the original sources was the Vanity Fair interview - the one they got worked up about as it covered sedation and other things they didn't want to talk about at that stage, and seems to have been put into the public domain without Proof reading by C-You Know who.

by jeanmonroe 31.05.14 12:16

Do the MET, and, by association, the McCanns, who are fully informed by the MET, as regards operations, so they constantly tell us, seriously believe that an entire country's police authority are SO 'naive' as to not have 'suspicions' about these (hastily?) proposed 'digs'?

We have the McCanns SUDDENLY 'wanting to know' 'death/body' being oft mentioned, but strangely, NOT being 'challenged' by the very litigious parents, who are, as we speak, involved in a libel case against the lead investigator of the investigation that sought to discover what had happened to their missing daughter, with regards to him 'harming/damaging' the search for their missing daughter by saying the words 'death/body' which are , today, being widely reported in the UK mainstream media.

What CHANGED in the last 3/4 weeks?

Anyway,

Do the MET (and the McCanns) seriously think that the PJ has not pored over every square centimetre of the areas 'indentified' by the MET since the MET left Portugal (over 3 weeks ago) and before they return, mob handed, next week?

Do the MET seriously believe the PJ are THAT 'naive'?

The PJ, and we know, that Faro police chief Luis Mota Carmo HAS already led a 'site' survey, have, probably, been out every day (and night?) investigating the MET 'identified' areas, with a fine toothed comb.

The PJ are NOT going to be 'surprised' (ridiculed by?) by ANYTHING the far 'superior' (self proclaimed) elite MET officers possibly 'discover/unearth' next week, in a 'revelation moment', imo.

Who's to say the PJ haven't, since the MET left, used specialist cadaver/blood dogs, equipment, from who knows where, to already have searched the proposed areas of 'digs'?

I wonder if any of the 'elite' Met 'search' officers, next week, have botanical degrees? winkwink