Re: Breaking News on Sky News - SY back in PDL suspects to be interviewed

by **PeterMac** 06.07.14 16:17

inspirespirit wrote:Unless I have missed some along the way, there definitely seems a lack of holiday snaps. SNIP

Can I recommend that you use the search engine and look at the several thread on photos, including the Last Photo.
It is, as you say astonishing that so few photos exist, but just to bring you up to speed, (and to stir up the Pro-child-neglecters) the Mccanns had two cameras, an Olympus and a Canon, and only one was handed to the PJ and sent for analysis in Britain.
The other was retained, and Kate confesses in her Voluntary Statement (Exhibit KH 1 - otherwise known as the book) that she kept it with her.
The Last Photo was only released two weeks later, once the metadata had - probably - been altered to show the date as 3rd. This had been taken on the camera which was not handed over.
Analysis of other photos and weather records show that it was - probably - taken on Sunday 29th.
The date of release coincides with Clarence Mitchell's appearance on the scene and Gerry's and his sisters return from the UK
Yet another of Kate's strange coincidences, perhaps.

by waiting for justice 06.07.14 16:20

inspirespirit wrote:Unless I have missed some along the way, there definitely seems a lack of holiday snaps. They had been there 5 or 6 days before the 3rd. Surely between the 9 of them they would have taken loads of photos of the kiddies. The photo they released was when she appeared much younger until they released the 'tennis' one. Even before digis, I used to take hundreds of photos of my kids on holiday. So maybe it did happen before the 3rd. I originally thought it happened the evening of the 3rd, when David Payne said he went to the apartment. I definitely remember at some point reading that he said he was there for half an hour yet Kate said he was there for 30 seconds !! That is a big difference in time, so I thought it happened around about then.

Unfortunately, taking countless number of pictures would require your children to be with you and not bundled into childcare. Unless they had long lenses of course lol

by Dubious 06.07.14 16:29

Bishop Brennan wrote:
BlackCatBoogie wrote:Another one from the Mail this morning. I think this one has it all - gypsies, scrubland, the water treatment plant, a prime suspect, a well, Euclides Monteiro, a deserted farmhouse...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2681763/875-yards-Maddie-disappeared-abandoned-police-failed-search.html

It really does have the lot - including the compulsory "bungled cops" side-swipe: "Mr Ramm said: ‘If this had been a Yard-led inquiry from the outset, there is no doubt that the search would have been wider and more effective than that conducted by the Portuguese police."

And the required 'no comment': The McCanns’ spokesman said yesterday: ‘Kate and Gerry continue to have full confidence in the work being carried out by the Met Police but will not comment on it.’"

Barrel scraping?

And there was me thinking the Daily Mail as being quiet

by AndyB 06.07.14 16:31

comperedna wrote:Accident, plus probable non-legal sedation, plus not having proper child care arrangements whilst they were out 'wining and dining' would be enough for them to lose their jobs, their status, and possibly their other children too.

That's still a likely scenario, but not the only one I keep in mind. If the above simple explanation is true, a huge edifice has been built onto it with staged abduction and all that followed it. The parents once on the whirling roundabout must stay on it.

I doubt that the neglect + illegal sedation of the simple scenario is anywhere near enough for them to lose their jobs (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/927-doctors-keep-jobs-despite-1508052) and, as they readily admit neglect and still have the twins, I don't think there would've been any serious issues with social services either. Having said that, they may have believed that those would be the consequences but surely one of them would've been collected enough to say "hang on, its not going to be that bad, you can't do that to your daughter".

I agree that the autopsy had to be avoided and that once they were on the roundabout they couldn't get off but, for me, the simple explanation above isn't enough for the McCann's to go down the route they apparently did and for all T9 to persist with the lie to this day. It therefore follows, to my mind at least, that one of your other reasons for avoiding an autopsy is the correct one. Can one of them also provide a potential explanation for the interference from the British establishment? I believe that it might but its a rhetorical question designed to illustrate the deductive path that I followed. It isn't meant to be answered.

by secrets and lies 06.07.14 16:39

Very interesting points being made.

One thing that occurs to me here is the lack of another key emotion-fear.

If they had indulged in a hasty, dramatic cover-up following the accidental death of their daughter, you might well expect to see a display of fear, nervousness, apprehension about being found out.

Instead they were calm, centered, self assured from the very first moment.

I have always suspected a "get-rich-quick" premeditated plan and a complete lack of concern about this child. They appear to be unable to access any emotions at all. Totally cut off in that regard, so cold blooded planning might well be feasible with this type of temperament.

Again, this is just a gut feeling and I hope to be proven wrong.

by Janetta 06.07.14 16:46

One thing which only recently struck me regarding the poolside photograph, and apologies if someone has mentioned this before is that Gerry McCann and the smaller child were wearing t shirts to which would have been to cover their shoulders on a hot day. Why then, if Madeleine was actually there, and it was a hot day why then would any responsible parent, let alone two doctors,let Madeleine sit at the poolside with her young bare shoulders exposed to the hot sun?

by Cristobell 06.07.14 17:12

AndyB wrote:
comperedna wrote:Accident, plus probable non-legal sedation, plus not having proper child care arrangements whilst they were out 'wining and dining' would be enough for them to lose their jobs, their status, and possibly their other children too.

That's still a likely scenario, but not the only one I keep in mind. If the above simple explanation is true, a huge edifice has been built onto it with staged abduction and all that followed it. The parents once on the whirling roundabout must stay on it.
I doubt that the neglect + illegal sedation of the simple scenario is anywhere near enough for them to lose their jobs (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/927-doctors-keep-jobs-despite-1508052) and, as they readily admit neglect and still have the twins, I don't think there would've been any serious issues with social services either. Having said that, they may have believed that those would be the consequences but surely one of them would've been collected enough to say "hang on, its not going to be that bad, you can't do that to your daughter".

____________________________________________________

REPY:

I hate to say this, but how long was Madeleine behind that sofa? Clearly long enough for the cadaver dog to pick up the scent 3 months later. Questions may have been asked as to why she had lain there so long.

If it had happened in a moment of anger, a crime of passion if you like, why leave the body there? Wouldn't you instinctively pick the child up, place her on a bed, move her in some way? I tend to think, regardless of how it happened, that shocked parents would not have left her lying on the floor. I am trying to imagine that moment of discovery, and who had a cool enough head to say don't move the body until we have figured out a plan. I suspect tick box 1 on that list, was move the sofa over the spot.

Imo, they were forensically aware enough to trash the apartment so they could later accuse the police of not preserving the crime scene. The move to the wardrobe was unavoidable in order to go through the whole dining in your garden façade. The wardrobe being another pointer that they had no 'man on the scene' to help them imo.

Why the had to hide the body is that million dollar question, and why have all the friends stuck rigidly to their stories. The longer it goes on the more fuel to adds to the wilder speculation, we can't help but imagine the worst, whatever the worst might be!

I agree that the autopsy had to be avoided and that once they were on the roundabout they couldn't get off but, for me, the simple explanation above isn't enough for the McCann's to go down the route they apparently did and for all T9 to persist with the lie to this day. It therefore follows, to my mind at least, that one of your other reasons for avoiding an autopsy is the correct one. Can one of them also provide a potential explanation for the interference from the British establishment? I believe that it might but its a rhetorical question designed to illustrate the deductive path that I followed. It isn't meant to be answered.

by Brian Griffin 06.07.14 17:26

AndyB wrote:I agree that the autopsy had to be avoided and that once they were on the roundabout they couldn't get off but, for me, the simple explanation above isn't enough for the McCann's to go down the route they apparently did and for all T9 to persist with the lie to this day.

I have wondered about that too. Just my theory here of course (like we all have to say that now like we are guilty of something!), but if Gerry is a Freemason, then maybe other members of the T9 were too, and they would be bound by oath to help out under a pact of secrecy. Also, if I am understanding the situation correctly, the tapas crowd were also professionals, and were also leaving their children alone for hours on end while they partied etc. Wouldn't this drag their neglect into the equation too? You know how the press like to tear people apart! They could have feared that they might have been exposed if anything bad were to come out. It's not beyond feasibility that they might even have been strong-armed into complying, a kind of 'we go down, we'll take you down with us' kind of thing. Just the idea of what might happen to your job, career, private life back home might be enough to gain compliance. Whatever the reason, to continue with the analogy - once they are on the roundabout, they can't get off either! Just my opinion, of course. I think that, if Madeleine had died of an overdose administered by the parents, then they would have been torn apart in the public eye back home, and I doubt they would have been able to continue working as doctors and their ability to look after the other kids would also have been thrown into question. It's a horrible situation whichever way you play it out, and I can see why a staged abduction (if that is what indeed it was) would have been preferable to vilification in the press back home. From a pragmatic point of view, if she is already dead, there is nothing you can do to bring her back so...

by Daryl Dixon 06.07.14 17:27

missmar1 wrote:

I always think of that odd remark Gerry Mccann made when he snapped to a reporter something to the effect of " find the body" Imo, that was a very strange thing for a missing child's dad to come out with just because he was annoyed at being asked something he took offence to.

The same thing happened when asked if he knew Robert Murat - Gerry replied he wasn't going to answer that .... imo, another strange remark for the father of a missing child to make. Given the situation, ( The Mccann's had claimed their child had been abducted ) you would think he would just answer questions as truthfully as an innocent desperate father would do when he has nothing to hide.

It's a myth that Gerry McCann said "find the body". A friend of the McCanns was quoted in the press as saying "The legitimate question to ask Portuguese police is: 'Where is the body? Where's the evidence that Madeleine is dead?'."

by Benion 06.07.14 17:29

Doctors have scene of crime training. When I was a junior doctor working in A&E we had to have the training prior to going out on the rapid response vehicle. We had to be trained in treating the patient (normally an assault victim) while trying to preserve the scene.

by inspirespirit 06.07.14 17:33

PeterMac wrote:
inspirespirit wrote:Unless I have missed some along the way, there definitely seems a lack of holiday snaps. SNIP

Can I recommend that you use the search engine and look at the several thread on photos, including the Last Photo.
It is, as you say astonishing that so few photos exist, but just to bring you up to speed, (and to stir up the Pro-child-neglecters) the Mccanns had two cameras, an Olympus and a Canon, and only one was handed to the PJ and sent for analysis in Britain.
The other was retained, and Kate confesses in her Voluntary Statement (Exhibit KH 1 - otherwise known as the book) that she kept it with her.
The Last Photo was only released two weeks later, once the metadata had - probably - been altered to show the date as 3rd. This had been taken on the camera which was not handed over.
Analysis of other photos and weather records show that it was - probably - taken on Sunday 29th.
The date of release coincides with Clarence Mitchell's appearance on the scene and Gerry's and his sisters return from the UK
Yet another of Kate's strange coincidences, perhaps.

Thank you. I had already been through all the threads on photos. :) Someone had previously mentioned in this thread that they thought she had died earlier in the week, and I was just toying with that idea in my mind, because of the lack of holiday snaps. I have read all about the pink hat/tennis ball originally supposed to have been taken a week later, which takes the whole case down another route. Also about shadows and bits missing and photoshopped. All gets a little bit Hercule Poirot for my liking. I like to try to stick with what we know factually.

by View-from-Ireland 06.07.14 17:44

Tony's debates with me on Smithman have got m thinking a lot.

When the McCanns made an appeal to Irish holidaymakers to send them their Portuguese photos, was this a covert message to the Smiths?

This opens up several possibilities. Why mention Ireland? It has a population about 10% that of Great Britain so why specifically mention Irish holidaymakers? How many could there have been, apart from the Smiths, in Luz that same week in early May 2007? Did they:

a) know the Smiths
b) Fear what the Smiths might have had in terms of photos
c) know whoever Smithman was and had feared that he betrayed himself in some form to the Irish group he bumped into that night?

by Justformaddie 06.07.14 17:54

Had gm heard the smith family talking, he probably knew they where Irish, good point vfi!

by autumn2014 06.07.14 17:57

Hello Everyone,

I have been reading this forum for over a year but have only just been brave enough to become a member and post.

While I was waiting to start my current job in aviation, I spent 8 months temping as admin support for a social services assessment team. I spoke to some of the social workers regarding this case and they made some valid points. Even as a Locum GP, Kate Mccann would have been well versed and trained in the safeguarding children policies and would therefore have known beyond any doubt that leaving 3 young children alone in an apartment whilst dining elsewhere would be regarded as neglect and child endangerment. They also said that unless there was intervention by people with a lot more power and clout than the Mccanns have, then they would have been properly assessed once they returned to the UK. As they said apart from the professionals involved the only people who would ever know the outcome of that investigation would be the Mccanns and only the Mccanns would be able to release information to the press, so the public would never know if their statements were true or not.

I can see why people go for the accidental death scenario but personally I believe there is much more to this. I doubt Gerry would have lost his job as a Cardiologist over a simple accidental death although Kate probably would have as a GP. The twins may not have been taken from them either but would have been on the at risk register at the very least. I can't see money being the only reason either, there was no guarantee the public were going to buy into their abduction theory, or even if they did, donate so much money to the fund. I agree with others who say they couldn't afford for an autopsy to be carried out, why is speculation and supposition but I fear that unless a body is found and cause of death established then there will never be any real justice for Madeleine.

by Cristobell 06.07.14 18:05

View-from-Ireland wrote:Tony's debates with me on Smithman have got m thinking a lot.

When the McCanns made an appeal to Irish holidaymakers to send them their Portuguese photos, was this a covert message to the Smiths?

This opens up several possibilities. Why mention Ireland? It has a population about 10% that of Great Britain so why specifically mention Irish holidaymakers? How many could there have been, apart from the Smiths, in Luz that same week in early May 2007? Did they:

a) know the Smiths
b) Fear what the Smiths might have had in terms of photos
c) know whoever Smithman was and had feared that he betrayed himself in some form to the Irish group he bumped into that night?

Very likely, vfi, I have seen a commentator mention this before about Gerry appealing for Irish witnesses to come forward. He would definitely have heard their accents, and could not risk replying with his own distinctive Scottish brogue.

by Guest 06.07.14 18:12

Justformaddie wrote:Had gm heard the smith family talking, he probably knew they where Irish, good point vfi!

I seem to recall that Mrs Smith did speak to the man they saw. She asked him if the child was asleep, but the man put his head down and looked away. So whoever was carrying that child would have heard Mrs Smith's voice. (See: Maddie: Irishman provides dramatic new clues, 03 January 2008 http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html ).

by lj 06.07.14 18:12

waiting for justice wrote:
inspirespirit wrote:Unless I have missed some along the way, there definitely seems a lack of holiday snaps. They had been there 5 or 6 days before the 3rd. Surely between the 9 of them they would have taken loads of photos of the kiddies. The photo they released was when she appeared much younger until they released the 'tennis' one. Even before digis, I used to take hundreds of photos of my kids on holiday. So maybe it did happen before the 3rd. I originally thought it happened the evening of the 3rd, when David Payne said he went to the apartment. I definitely remember at some point reading that he said he was there for half an hour yet Kate said he was there for 30 seconds !! That is a big difference in time, so I thought it happened around about then.

Unfortunately, taking countless number of pictures would require your children to be with you and not bundled into childcare. Unless they had long lenses of course lol

by Justformaddie 06.07.14 18:21

Any word on tomorrow yet? Or is that Tuesday? Wonder if the rest of the met came home?

by Brian Griffin 06.07.14 18:50

What doesn't make sense is why they would carry on with the show. I know people say it's for the money, but as doctors, they are already on very good salaries. If they had committed a crime, wouldn't it just be better to let it all settle and fade into the back of the public consciousness? Then quietly move overseas. Instead it's in the media all the damned time! Why let that happen - or even encourage it - if you've got something to hide? In my books that's one point in favour of TM and their interpretation of events.

by Benion 06.07.14 18:51

Brian Griffin wrote:What doesn't make sense is why they would carry on with the show. I know people say it's for the money, but as doctors, they are already on very good salaries. If they had committed a crime, wouldn't it just be better to let it all settle and fade into the back of the public consciousness? Then quietly move overseas. Instead it's in the media all the damned time! Why let that happen - or even encourage it - if you've got something to hide? In my books that's one point in favour of TM and their interpretation of events.

Because they are narcissists and love the media attention

by Guest 06.07.14 18:52

Benion wrote:
Brian Griffin wrote:What doesn't make sense is why they would carry on with the show. I know people say it's for the money, but as doctors, they are already on very good salaries. If they had committed a crime, wouldn't it just be better to let it all settle and fade into the back of the public consciousness? Then quietly move overseas. Instead it's in the media all the damned time! Why let that happen - or even encourage it - if you've got something to hide? In my books that's one point in favour of TM and their interpretation of events.
Because they are narcissists and love the media attention

... and the money.

by AndyB 06.07.14 18:54

Brian Griffin wrote:I have wondered about that too. Just my theory here of course (like we all have to say that now like we are guilty of something!), but if Gerry is a Freemason, then maybe other members of the T9 were too, and they would be bound by oath to help out under a pact of secrecy. Also, if I am understanding the situation correctly, the tapas crowd were also professionals, and were also leaving their children alone for hours on end while they partied etc. Wouldn't this drag their neglect into the equation too? You know how the press like to tear people apart! They could have feared that they might have been exposed if anything bad were to come out. It's not beyond feasibility that they might even have been strong-armed into complying, a kind of 'we go down, we'll take you down with us' kind of thing. Just the idea of what might happen to your job, career, private life back home might be enough to gain compliance. Whatever the reason, to continue with the analogy - once they are on the roundabout, they can't get off either! Just my opinion, of course. I think that, if Madeleine had died of an overdose administered by the parents, then they would have been torn apart in the public eye back home, and I doubt they would have been able to continue working as doctors and their ability to look after the other kids would also have been thrown into question. It's a horrible situation whichever way you play it out, and I can see why a staged abduction (if that is what indeed it was) would have been preferable to vilification in the press back home. From a pragmatic point of view, if she is already dead, there is nothing you can do to bring her back so...

They can't have been dragged in over fear of a press drubbing over neglect because they all readily admit it. Its possible, of course, that, like many on here believe, there was no neglect and that this was an invention to facilitate and abduction. Irrespective of whether its true or not, the T9 voluntarily involved themselves at the Rothley meeting with the vow of silence. Something motivated them to do this, which brings me to the second bit that I've emboldened: They may not be able to get off the roundabout now they're on it but they didn't need to get on it in the first place

by tiny 06.07.14 18:55

Justformaddie wrote:Any word on tomorrow yet? Or is that Tuesday? Wonder if the rest of the met came home?

From the sunday mirror,

Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “Kate and Gerry are planning to attend court on Tuesday as required by the judge. They believe they have a very strong case against Mr Amaral and they expect to win their claim.”