MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Reference Forum for all information regarding translations and PT Law etc and other useful information.

MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby bjr » Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:28 pm

NEW MAIN MADELEINE THREAD.

I have created another main Madeleine Thread as the other thread has turned in a personal sniping thread about posters and their egos. Please could you refrain from letting this thread disintegrate into that if you have any respect for Madeleine. I have copied the last two posts Main Madeleine Posts onto this new thread.

Please note any member may post on this thread irrespective of their views on the case. Any further attempts to derail this thread into ego trips and sniping between posters on a personal level will result in posts being deleted.
To my critics
When I'm in a sober mood, I worry, work and think,
When I'm in a drunken mood, I gamble, play and drink,
But when my moods are over and my time has come to pass,
I hope I'm buried upside down, so the world may kiss my ar*e
User avatar
bjr
Moderator
 
Posts: 4181
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 2:10 pm
Location: 3rd Cesspit from left of Rothley Towers

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby HAPPYDOG » Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:30 pm

Whatever I can so understand what you mean. I remember one article in the early days that blonde woman Ulrika saying something like 'Maddie's our child'. It really struck home. I remember in the early days feeling nothing at all but pain and sympathy for them no feelings of being mislead or anything.

My feelings gradually changed when I actually saw THEM on t.v. and Gerry's blog and the fund. Things really started to change for me. I wanted to know how they could go on like that, how could they go on the tour, why could they answer certain questions but not tell us anything substantial, how I was mislead about how far away that apartment actually was in relation to where they were dining. It wasn't like being in the back garden not at all it was so far away so very far. But what has got me the most is their publicity 'team' how they can go out there and represent a charity for missing children or try and get involved in the amber alert system, when in reality the amber alert would have done nothing for them bearing in mind the time they left her in that apartment and the times they checked. I don't know it's just that there seems to be so many inconsistencies.

I know it's none of my business of course it's not it's the police that should be dealing with this, the problem is the McCanns with their media blitz have made it something I WANT to know about. They were made arguidos and when they came back they told us all about how it couldn't have been them because of soiled nappies, Kate's corpse visits and things. Then to hear from Mrs. Healy about how it would be better for Kate and she would get more sympathy if she had a larger bosom, come on why should they expect sympathy for what they look like, or don't look like and for what they did.

I still can't believe that a group of professional people went out and left all those children in those apartments alone.

What makes me more upset is that deep down I think it's because of their status that they have been 'admired' from so many supporters. I can't understand it I just can't.
HAPPYDOG
XXXXX
User avatar
HAPPYDOG
Local Lag
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 11:31 am

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby blossom » Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:32 pm

elizabeth wrote:I do not believe that you can dismiss the possibility of a government cover up because people know about it. That would be allowing the government too much ability. When an administration wants things to go away they don't always. And if you doubt that, ask Richard M. Nixon.

The truth is, the Labor party is so steeped in arrogance, they would be perfectly prepared to protect the McCanns and not bother who knew. Because they have the same sense of invulnerability that the McCanns have. Does this mean there is a cover up? No. But it is not a reason to discount the possibility.

There has to be a reason for the treatment of the McCanns. And their own arrogance and repeated lying with no fear of any come back. That is because there is no come back. When mother child neglector went on national radio and declared the tapas bar was only 20 yards from the apartment, no one, not a single person on the program said, 'That is not right.' It was accepted as the truth. The changing story about the frequency of the checks and the un/locked door is never questioned. Why? Is it just a latent xenophobia surfacing because the police are 'sardine munching' foreigners?

The one thing is that a large part of the rest of the world now regards the British as a nation of child neglectors. The media and the government and all the bodies tasked with protecting children either support the child neglect practised by these pathetic excuses for parents or are noticable by their deafening silence.


An excellent post.
Last edited by bjr on Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Have removed part comment as it referred to previous thread.
blossom
Local Lag
 
Posts: 957
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 2:27 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby diddy » Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:03 pm

I'm so excited to be on page one, I almost don't know what to put!

Happy, I know what you mean.
I dislike the way the Mcs come across so much that I almost don't feel sorry for them, and I think that's terrible.
If it happened as the PJ think, then I suspect it may have been accidental, so to not feel sorry for them is pretty awful, as it still means they have lost a loved child.
The charade must go on.
User avatar
diddy
On Parole
 
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby Syrup » Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:14 pm

Not sure if this has been said already, IF the McCanns do go back to PT, I wonder if they will take the twins with them?
Roll on Monday, I now have two weeks off works thanks to the lateness of Easter this year, I will be glued to the TV for a lot of it :lol: :lol:
Syrup
New In Town
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:04 pm
Location: Georgian city of Bath, standing behind Clarrie in sainsburys!!!

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby bloggit22 » Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:16 pm

Indeed HAPPYDOG.......their 15 minutes of fame came with an enormous price.......I can remember back to the first few weeks when everyone was just beginning to piece together what had happened....... and were appauled that two professional people (with a larger group of professionals) could act in the way they did, by leaving their children alone whilst out drinking and having fun.

It's not something I would be proud of........
User avatar
bloggit22
Suspect
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:18 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby Camera » Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:44 pm

Pork pie makers celebrate status

Melton Mowbray pork pies are made with uncured pork

After a 10-year fight, Melton Mowbray pork pies have been given Protected Geographical Status (PGI) by officials in Europe.

The move means that only producers making pork pies using a traditional recipe and in the vicinity of Melton Mowbray can use the town's name.



Does Rothley come in the Melton Mowbray area? Because there've been enough pork pies coming out of there the last six months. And are Melton Mowbray pork pies pink?
User avatar
Camera
New In Town
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:08 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby bloggit22 » Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:49 pm

Camera wrote:
Pork pie makers celebrate status

Melton Mowbray pork pies are made with uncured pork

After a 10-year fight, Melton Mowbray pork pies have been given Protected Geographical Status (PGI) by officials in Europe.

The move means that only producers making pork pies using a traditional recipe and in the vicinity of Melton Mowbray can use the town's name.



Does Rothley come in the Melton Mowbray area? Because there've been enough pork pies coming out of there the last six months. And are Melton Mowbray pork pies pink?



Maybe the 'waffle' factory is near Rothley too....
User avatar
bloggit22
Suspect
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:18 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby lincoln green » Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:16 pm

bloggit22 wrote:
Camera wrote:
Pork pie makers celebrate status

Melton Mowbray pork pies are made with uncured pork

After a 10-year fight, Melton Mowbray pork pies have been given Protected Geographical Status (PGI) by officials in Europe.

The move means that only producers making pork pies using a traditional recipe and in the vicinity of Melton Mowbray can use the town's name.



Does Rothley come in the Melton Mowbray area? Because there've been enough pork pies coming out of there the last six months. And are Melton Mowbray pork pies pink?



Maybe the 'waffle' factory is near Rothley too....


And the yarn spinning emporium.
User avatar
lincoln green
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:11 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby batperson » Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:24 pm

If the twins are subject to an interim care order, then they would need the permission of a family court judge if they wanted to take them outside England and Wales. Given their current status and what happened last time they took kids abroad, this would be very unlikely to be granted.

If they do take the twins, we can be reasonably sure that they are not subject to any kind of care order. The converse is not true, BTW.

I suspect the twins will be staying with Trish Cameron while the McCanns are away.

.batperson
User avatar
batperson
You're Nicked
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 6:56 pm
Location: Never far away...

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby bloggit22 » Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:32 pm

batperson wrote:If the twins are subject to an interim care order, then they would need the permission of a family court judge if they wanted to take them outside England and Wales. Given their current status and what happened last time they took kids abroad, this would be very unlikely to be granted.

If they do take the twins, we can be reasonably sure that they are not subject to any kind of care order. The converse is not true, BTW.

I suspect the twins will be staying with Trish Cameron while the McCanns are away.

.batperson


Unless, of course, they take some of the family with them
User avatar
bloggit22
Suspect
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:18 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby HAPPYDOG » Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:54 pm

I've posted this before, this is from an American cyber buddy of mine, not me, I wish I'd taken the time to go through it all, anyways here goes, all relevant in light of the recent 'Sorry' from the Express blah blah, and why I still feel suspicious of the McCAnns.

I was thrown for a bit of a loop today with the admission of guilt from The Express.
I started to second guess myself.
Have I become so tainted that I believe in the guilt of the McCanns merely because
of what I have been poisoned with from the papers?
Could I be wrong, and overly suspcious? Am I what I have accused so many of,
merely a follower ...swept up in the momentum of a story that I truly know very few
"facts" about?
I had to sit back and really examine what exactly made me think that these two,
seemingly average people, with no past of violence, who wanted children so
desperately ...could be involved in the disappearance of their first born.
I had to ask myself if I had been poisend by newspapers!!!!

So I set out to reveiw some things today and here is what I found:
The things that made me come to some conclusions, or at the very least
question ........the sources were for the most part...the McCanns, not the Tabloids.
Let me explain further:

When Jon Corner was Interviewed he said Kate called him in the night and here is
what he said:
"Kate said the shutters of the room were smashed
. Madeleine was missing
It looks as though someone had gone straight past the twins to get to her.
Kate was incredibly upset. I've spoken to her since, and she's still completely devastated."

~It also says in this interview that Kate told him that the doors were all locked.
As we know now, the doors were not locked, The shutters were not Smashed, as
we all seen on the TV footage of the person who was dusting for prints. The
shutters were intact.
~And if the shutters seemed suspicious in any way, why didnt anyone doing the checks of
the children notice? So many of them should have walked by them.
She also told Jon that she didnt feel like the Police were
doing enough to search for Madeleine. We all know that they were there searching,
as were many of the guests, as well as staff all hours of the night.
There were many people searching, all but Kate.


Jill Renwick, a family friend, told GMTV at 7:45am, on the morning of 04 May, that the distraught parents were certain that Madeline had been abducted. "They were just watching the hotel room and going back every half-hour."
Ok as we all know, they could not see their apt. from Tapas.
why would they say they could?


~Now Gerry calls his sister Trish and he tells her, the same night.
Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone.
The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters were jemmied open.
Nothing had been touched and no valuables taken."

~So at this point he is saying even the bedroom was locked, inside the apt? Hmmm...well, he
clearly doesnt stick with this story..

Then there is what they tell his sister Philomena..
Philomena McCann, said on 04 May: "Some people may ask why they left the children alone
in the apartment but it was locked and they had a full view of the front door and they were
checking every half hour
."

When Ian Woods asks: ''Is there a temptation for them to get out and try and search themselves...'' Philomena
replies: ''Yeah, well, I mean for Gerry and Kate they want to get out there, they want to search everything,
they want to leave nothing unturned.'' - Yet Kate later admits, in the McCanns first interview with Jane Hill
from the BBC, that she never actually did any physical searching. There are also no reports that Gerry ever searched beyond the first few immediate hours after Madeleine's disappearance.
~We know they did not have a full view of the front door. Period. They couldnt have seen the
comings and goings. They knew the shutters werent smashed. They knew the doors were
not locked. They knew there were alot of people searching.
so why.......? I would like to know why? and that doesnt come from the Tabloids.
Ok all these things in and of themselves may not seem all that significant. A small change in detail here or there. But think about it, this is the night your child has just gone missing and you cant remember the smallest thing like...whether or not the shutter was just opened or "smashed". If you could see your apt. from where you were wining and dining with friends?
So many things..i wont repeat them all,,,,,you get the picture.
These things make you pause and wonder...why the inconsistencies...i wont call them lies, i dont know them to be lies, only the McCanns know that.
Could just be mistakes right? They were in a state of panic afterall.
BUT THEN I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS:
Janes account of the abductor. She originally reports the man to be smartly dressed like the
Briitish dress, described him as carrying some sort of package, and going toward Baptista.
Months later her acct. morphs into he was heading toward Robert Murats house, carrying
Madeleine herself, and he was swarthy.
Now mind you, no one saw Jane, and two independant witnesses have come forward to say they were in her location at the time and she was not there. Even Gerry and Mr. Wilkins say they did not see her. She obviously wasnt there. So why is she lying.? The most obvious reason would be she is lying to protect someone, but who? Gerry and Kate or her husband.? I personally say that her families well-being and livelihood would be much more worthy of her loyalty and protecton, then her friends, but what do i know?
My question here is ...why Jane? Why didnt you notice the supposed Smashed shutters? You would have had to walk right by them...your window to your apt. is very close to Madeleine's room. and window. Why Jane, who are you protecting. In your Interview you gave you explained your silence ,after the fact, was due to the PJ who have sworn you to secrecy because of their laws. So why are you on National TV now? Those laws still apply. What changed?
Why would Gerry stand behind Jane, knowing he nor Mr Wilkins saw her on the road? Gerry remembers that he didnt see anyone previous nights..so obviously he is aware of his surroundings.

Again in interviews...not Newspapers....when asked by Interviewer Jane Hill about searching:
Kate: (Pause) I mean, I did. Errm... (Long Pause) Errm, we'd been working really hard really. Apart...
I mean, the first 48 hours, as Gerry said, are incredibly difficult and we were almost non-functioning, I'd say, errm, but after that you get strength from somewhere. We've certainly had loads of support and that's given us strength and its been able to make us focus really so we have actually, in our own way, it might not be physically searching but we've been working really hard and doing absolutely everything we can really to get Madeleine back
."

~The question was about if Kate searched for Madeleine.......did she answer the question? Oh ya, she says they searched except for the actual physical searching kind.
How else do u search???
Later in same Interview Jane Hill asks if she thought maybe she just wandered off?
Kate: 'Not at all, no' (There is then a pause, where Jane Hill may well have expected Kate to elucidate the reasoning behind her bold answer but Kate doesn't say anymore - after an embarrassingly long pause Gerry takes over and answers the question
).

Kates Interview with Womans Hour in Aug. Jenny: 'Was she sleeping when you left her?' Kate: (Long pause) 'Errm, yes, she was, yeah'
~there was a significant pause...i wonder what she was pondering? That is a yes or no question really.
Kate: 'Well, obviously I kind of looked and double looked and, errm, you know, obviously, there was twenty seconds of, you know, she must be there (laughs). Errm, but there was no doubt in my mind within (laughs) probably thirty seconds, errm, that Madeleine had been taken from that room.
I can't go into the reasons why I thought that but it was... no doubt whatsoever.
And Madeleine wouldn't have walked out herself. I know that.'

~These reasons and explanations they talk about.....when are they going to answer? They allude to the fact that they are bound by secrecy laws, but helloooooo youre on TV....so how do they govern what is an answerable question and a non-answerable question?
I wonder who is the line drawer? And what happens if you cross it? What happens if you dont? Kate and Jane hide behind..we cant answer that, and then they do Interviews on TV and give detail after detail..then suddenly they back-up and say they are bound by secrecy laws. Am I the only one that finds that .............................convenient.?
The next response Kate gives, is more bizarre than any tabloid could ever create!

Jenny: 'And how will you deal with the guilt that will probably stay with you forever of having left Madeleine alone?'
Kate: 'Well, I have actually come to terms a little bit with... with that, Jenny, I mean, you know...
I know the, errm, I know the situation that we were in that night
and uh, I've said all along, I didn't feel I was taking a risk. Errm, yeah, I... I do feel desperately sorry I wasn't with Madeleine at that minute when she was taken. Errm, I'd also like to mention I've had so much support from so many people. I've had so many letters and comments sent me.. sent to me from other families, and particularly other mums saying, you know, we have done what you have done a hundred times over, do not blame yourself.'

~My question is, in such a short period of time, how do you move through all the stages that are associated with mourning a loss?

im so sorry for such a long post. But all of this adds up to.....its not all about the newspapers........................
HAPPYDOG
XXXXX
User avatar
HAPPYDOG
Local Lag
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 11:31 am

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby Vimes » Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:21 pm

The thread is dead - long live the thread!

:wink:
Champion of the burnt crunchy bits school of culinary appreciation.
User avatar
Vimes
Local Lag
 
Posts: 973
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:32 pm
Location: Ankh-Morpork

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby mexx » Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:37 pm

HAPPYDOG wrote:What makes me more upset is that deep down I think it's because of their status that they have been 'admired' from so many supporters. I can't understand it I just can't.




I can't understand it either. Free education has been available in UK for decades, an attempt to rid UK of class differences which had previously been based on profession and/or inherited wealth and as far as my naive self went I truly believed it had mostly achieved its aim. McCanns are people who chose to study medicine, instead of, for instance, public sewerage systems and disposal.

Nowadays, those who can make a load of money from con tricks like to think of themselves as "class", but they don't fool many.

McCanns have neither the wealthy background, nor the manners and etiquette of the educated, nor of the decent poor.

What do they have to command such a following? It's pure trickery.

In this criminal investigation they're relying on "innocent until proved guilty", a role no genuine "class" person would demean to. The media has been afraid to criticise them from Day One, yes, afraid, like they were afraid to criticise Hitler during the 2nd world war, and more recently, like people were afraid to criticise Saddam Hussein. Who would be the first to stick their neck out? Only suicidal folk, because there would be many casualties before the truth became acceptable. IMO these McCanns are very evil, or sick, people.
mexx
On Parole
 
Posts: 1227
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:22 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK IV

Postby Whatever » Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:04 am

This 'double looked' business has bothered me for some time....



Kate: 'Well, obviously I kind of looked and double looked and, errm, you know, obviously, there was twenty seconds of, you know, she must be there (laughs). Errm, but there was no doubt in my mind within (laughs) probably thirty seconds, errm, that Madeleine had been taken from that room.
I can't go into the reasons why I thought that but it was... no doubt whatsoever.
And Madeleine wouldn't have walked out herself. I know that.'


and I think I've worked out why:

She's describing the process your brain goes through when an inanimate object has disappeared. Think stolen car. You come out of your house and look at the place you last left your car, expecting it to be there and it isn't. You look and then you 'double look' (she's trying - I suspect - to avoid saying 'do a double-take'.) Then you go into denial. 'It MUST be there'. You kind of keep looking at the space where it should be, almost willing it to be there. And then you know - it's been stolen. After all - there's no way it could have just driven off by itself.

If this had been a true story, this description would have gone more like:

'I walked into the bedroom and saw that she wasn't there. I thought 'Oh. Where is she?' and I went to see if she was in the loo, or in the other bedroom. I checked in the bathroom and the bedroom and she wasn't there. I was saying 'Madeleine, where are you?' quietly,because I didn't want to wake the twins. I went back into her bedroom. I don't know why, but I thought she MUST be in there. I wondered if she was hiding or something - she's never done that before, but I just couldn't understand where she could be. I looked under the beds, I went into the bathroom again and looked behind the shower curtain, I went into the living room, I looked behind the sofa - I was starting to panic. I looked everywhere. My brain just couldn't take it in. Why wasn't she there! It didn't make sense. I felt her bed to see if it was still warm, I looked for her cuddly....I was really starting to panic. I thought 'she must have gone up to Jane's' I ran up the stairs and banged on Jane's door. 'Is Madeleine in here??' Jane was like, 'No WHY??' I told her I couldn't find Madeleine and I ran back down the stairs. I was calling her name and shouting out for her now. Jane couldn't help me because her daughter was being sick. I didn't know what to do. I was panic striken. I went down to the carpark to see if she was somehow stuck there...maybe she'd gone out to find us and got lost or something. She was nowhere to be seen and it was so quiet. All I could hear was my own heart thumping in my chest and my voice calling her name. I ran back up to the apartment and I searched again and then I ran back to the Tapas....I ran up to them and I was shaking. They were all laughing and talking. I shouted, 'Madeleine's disappeared!!' Gerry stood up and ran to the apartment. Then everybody started running around and searching and calling her name.

I have heard Kate telling her 'double-looked' story on Radio 4 and it's like she's made herself remember when she last lost something and based her story on that. It just doesn't work. The only way she'd know for sure that Madeleine hadn't walked out by herself is if the doors were all locked or if, somehow, she was an object. The only way she could be an 'object' would be if she was already dead. :shock: But then that would mean she was dead before they left for dinner - and therefore so much for the accident whilst eating theory.
'okay, we've tried really hard and we've come up with nothing' - K. McCann
User avatar
Whatever
Hardened Criminal
 
Posts: 1511
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:39 pm

Next

Return to Maddy - Reference Forum and Investigations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests
cron