McCanns launch new appeal

[Isabella]

From the Express yesterday

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/91837/Anniversary-of-pain-to-bring-new-Maddie-appeal

For Kate, who looked happy and relaxed, it was her second Mother’s Day without Madeleine, now five

A back handed insult IMO

 

[Isabella]

You really should look at the swearing parrot video. It might help you work out how the Gerry video was done.

I dont need to to be honest. Like many others...i do not think he said "bog off"

 

[Jayelles]

With all respects - i havent suggested the Pjs missed anything at all. I said i believe they was let down by the British Police and there was an involvement there shouldnt have been.

No the British Police wasnt in charge of the case - however they didnt supply information that was requested.

But you are suggesting that justice hasn't been done - that is completely at odds with saying that the pjs did a good job.

If you think they did a good job of investigating the McCanns then why can't you accept their conclusions? They cleared the McCanns on the grounds of lack of evidence that they committed ANY crime. Are you suggesting the pjs are stupid?

 

[Jayelles]

From the Express yesterday

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/91837/Anniversary-of-pain-to-bring-new-Maddie-appeal

For Kate, who looked happy and relaxed, it was her second Mother’s Day without Madeleine, now five

A back handed insult IMO

Perhaps, but is it evidence?

ETA - I don't read the Express. It is a downmarket tabloid newspaper. Not recommended if you are looking for factual stgories.

 

[Jayelles]

Isabella selected just one phrase from the Express article and I'm sad that the only part of the article she felt was significant enough to quote was the apparent jab at Kate McCann.

For the record, the article is actually about Madeleine. It is called "Anniversary of Pain to bring new Maddie Appeal":-

THE parents of Madeleine McCann are planning to give a rare television interview to make a fresh appeal for information which they hope could lead to her being found.

Kate and Gerry McCann are also considering flying out to Portugal in the coming weeks to boost their renewed efforts there for a breakthrough in the run-up to the second anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance on May 3.

SNIP

“We urge you to remember Madeleine as a real, living and findable little girl. In spite of all the investigative work done, there is still absolutely nothing to suggest harm to Madeleine and therefore, a very real likelihood that Madeleine is alive and well. It is vital that we never, ever give up on Madeleine.”

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/91837/Anniversary-of-pain-to-bring-new-Maddie-appeal

 

[Moab]

[FONT=&quot]From the Express yesterday[/FONT]

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/91837/Anniversary-of-pain-to-bring-new-Maddie-appeal

For Kate, who looked happy and relaxed, it was her second Mother’s Day without Madeleine, now five

A back handed insult IMO

[FONT=&quot]The only insult I see here is the culling of one partial sentence which didn't even emphasize the intent or context of the article which is a heartfelt appeal for information on their missing daughter.[/FONT]

 

[Isabella]

But you are suggesting that justice hasn't been done - that is completely at odds with saying that the pjs did a good job.

If you think they did a good job of investigating the McCanns then why can't you accept their conclusions? They cleared the McCanns on the grounds of lack of evidence that they committed ANY crime. Are you suggesting the pjs are stupid?

Nope - im suggesting our police are stupid not the Pjs. Wasnt the Pjs fault the British cops wouldnt give them the info they wanted.

 

[Isabella]

Perhaps, but is it evidence?

ETA - I don't read the Express. It is a downmarket tabloid newspaper. Not recommended if you are looking for factual stgories.

Lol if you want the factual stories..about this case I wouldnt bother reading ANY British papers MOO

 

[Texana]

Yes the friends did get there later. The McCanns were first to arrive.

Unfortunately that's not confirmed. There were several accounts of differeing times, which is one of the reasons the PJ wanted all of the Tapas 9 to re-enact the evening.

The timeline accounts varied and then were changed. I can understand you might infer that doesn't mean the McCanns (or anyone else) was involved in something regarding Madeleine's disappearance, but it does mean the time line is unreliable in terms of ruling them out.

It does not prove their involvement but it does not prove their innocence either.

 

[Isabella]

Unfortunately that's not confirmed. There were several accounts of differeing times, which is one of the reasons the PJ wanted all of the Tapas 9 to re-enact the evening.

The timeline accounts varied and then were changed. I can understand you might infer that doesn't mean the McCanns (or anyone else) was involved in something regarding Madeleine's disappearance, but it does mean the time line is unreliable in terms of ruling them out.

It does not prove their involvement but it does not prove their innocence either.

But Tex..the McCanns claim they was the first ones there..and from what ive read the friends gave different times for the McCanns..one said they got there around 8.55. Now firstly why would the friends say they was there that late if they was supposedly the first ones to get there? And secondly if they didnt get there til 8.55-9 what was the real reason that Gerry went to check on the kids immediately afterwards?

And then people say the McCanns should be believed. But how can you believe them when none of the group can agree on anything?

Btw there are reports that Gerry and Kate may be going back there for the anniversary of her "disappearance". What do you think the chances of them doing a reconstruction are whilst there out there? I mean if they REALLY want to try and find there daughter this would be a good idea..right?

 

[Texana]

You see, this is where the McCanns come off as disingenuous, to put it nicely, and lying, to put it strongly. They say:

“We urge you to remember Madeleine as a real, living and findable little girl. In spite of all the investigative work done, there is still absolutely nothing to suggest harm to Madeleine and therefore, a very real likelihood that Madeleine is alive and well. It is vital that we never, ever give up on Madeleine.”

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/91837/Anniversary-of-pain-to-bring-new-Maddie-appeal

"Absolutely nothing" leaves out the fact that the two most highly rated, most highly respected evidence dogs--cadaver and blood evidence--alerted not only in the McCann apartment but in their car as well.

The dogs were not Portuguese. They were British crime solving dogs, and ignoring their responses is pitiful. It is so egregious, that I have to ask myself why the McCanns would issue such a statement. Even if they truly believe their child is missing and alive, to ignore the evidence of the dogs is a kind of wilful ignorance of the truth. It brings to mind the statement, repeat a lie often enough and it will be believed.

You cannot defend this statement from the McCanns. It is, quite frankly, a lie.

The McCanns could have said "We still believe Madeleine is alive." They could have said "no credible evidence" although that would have perhaps opened up legal issues with Eddie and Keela's actions. As well, they conveniently ignored the DNA test evidence.

The DNA testing does NOT rule out that Madeleine is not dead. If anything, logically speaking, it points strongly to Madeleine's decomposing body being placed in the boot or wheel well of the rented Renault. These DNA tests were ONE marker short of conclusively showing Madeleine's DNA was that found. The only reason the DNA was not matched to Madeleine conclusively was because of the degradation of the material. That means the possibility of the match exists in reality. Identifying anyone else as the donor of the material can be ruled out as no markers were found that did not belong to Madeleine.

Again, the McCanns could have used so many different words in their appeal, but the phrase "absolutely nothing" is just a flat out deliberate ignorance of the truth.

 

[Isabella]

You see, this is where the McCanns come off as disingenuous, to put it nicely, and lying, to put it strongly. They say:

“We urge you to remember Madeleine as a real, living and findable little girl. In spite of all the investigative work done, there is still absolutely nothing to suggest harm to Madeleine and therefore, a very real likelihood that Madeleine is alive and well. It is vital that we never, ever give up on Madeleine.”

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/91837/Anniversary-of-pain-to-bring-new-Maddie-appeal

"Absolutely nothing" leaves out the fact that the two most highly rated, most highly respected evidence dogs--cadaver and blood evidence--alerted not only in the McCann apartment but in their car as well.

The dogs were not Portuguese. They were British crime solving dogs, and ignoring their responses is pitiful. It is so egregious, that I have to ask myself why the McCanns would issue such a statement. Even if they truly believe their child is missing and alive, to ignore the evidence of the dogs is a kind of wilful ignorance of the truth. It brings to mind the statement, repeat a lie often enough and it will be believed.

You cannot defend this statement from the McCanns. It is, quite frankly, a lie.

The McCanns could have said "We still believe Madeleine is alive." They could have said "no credible evidence" although that would have perhaps opened up legal issues with Eddie and Keela's actions. As well, they conveniently ignored the DNA test evidence.

The DNA testing does NOT rule out that Madeleine is not dead. If anything, logically speaking, it points strongly to Madeleine's decomposing body being placed in the boot or wheel well of the rented Renault. These DNA tests were ONE marker short of conclusively showing Madeleine's DNA was that found. The only reason the DNA was not matched to Madeleine conclusively was because of the degradation of the material. That means the possibility of the match exists in reality. Identifying anyone else as the donor of the material can be ruled out as no markers were found that did not belong to Madeleine.

Again, the McCanns could have used so many different words in their appeal, but the phrase "absolutely nothing" is just a flat out deliberate ignorance of the truth.

To be honest there not stupid - they know they can say absolutely anything to our media and it will be printed and that it wont be questioned ( by the reporters at least) because if they DO question it the McCanns will threaten to sue them again.

One question ive been meaning to ask ( regarding suing) when the claims were made that Madeleiene wasnt Gerrys daughter he kept shouting that he was going to sue the publication that said that. Given that we know Gerry and his buddies like to sue . do you know whether or not Gerry did sue them about that?

Btw something that i read today ( and im trying to get a confirmed link for this ) But Gordon Brown has confirmed that he and the McCanns have friends in common. IMO it would be very interesting to know just who these friends are.

 

[Texana]

But Tex..the McCanns claim they was the first ones there..and from what ive read the friends gave different times for the McCanns..one said they got there around 8.55. Now firstly why would the friends say they was there that late if they was supposedly the first ones to get there? And secondly if they didnt get there til 8.55-9 what was the real reason that Gerry went to check on the kids immediately afterwards?

And then people say the McCanns should be believed. But how can you believe them when none of the group can agree on anything?

Btw there are reports that Gerry and Kate may be going back there for the anniversary of her "disappearance". What do you think the chances of them doing a reconstruction are whilst there out there? I mean if they REALLY want to try and find there daughter this would be a good idea..right?

Well, yes, it would be nice if all of the friends went back for a reconstruction. So you have to ask, why did they not go back? They must have credible reasons or else one can infer they have other motives.

The time line doesn't make sense as you note. So the question then is why it doesn't make sense.

 

[Isabella]

Well, yes, it would be nice if all of the friends went back for a reconstruction. So you have to ask, why did they not go back? They must have credible reasons or else one can infer they have other motives.

The time line doesn't make sense as you note. So the question then is why it doesn't make sense.

The friends said last year that they was happy to go back to do the reconstruction or some were at least but they was advised not to do it by the McCanns themselves.

As for the time line personally i think it doesnt make sense because they didnt want it to...lets face it nothing they does makes a scrap of sense IMO

 

[april4sky]

Unfortunately that's not confirmed. There were several accounts of differeing times, which is one of the reasons the PJ wanted all of the Tapas 9 to re-enact the evening.

The timeline accounts varied and then were changed. I can understand you might infer that doesn't mean the McCanns (or anyone else) was involved in something regarding Madeleine's disappearance, but it does mean the time line is unreliable in terms of ruling them out.

It does not prove their involvement but it does not prove their innocence either.

The several accounts didn't come from the McCanns or their friends. Though missinformation was leaked to discredit them.

And their timeline accounts didn't vary any more than is natural between any group of witnesses.

Texana can you please link confirmation that any of them ever changed their statements. TIA.
As far as I know the final report doesn't support this accusation so I suspect it's just one of the many malicious rumours leaked by the PJ.

 

[Isabella]

The several accounts didn't come from the McCanns or their friends. Though missinformation was leaked to discredit them.

And their timeline accounts didn't vary any more than is natural between any group of witnesses.

Texana can you please link confirmation that any of them ever changed their statements. TIA.
As far as I know the final report doesn't support this accusation so I suspect it's just one of the many malicious rumours leaked by the PJ. For the record it certainly didnt come from the Pjs the time line i heard when it said the McCanns were the last to arrive

With all respect the McCanns and there friends dont need the Pjs to discredit them. They do a fine job of that themselves.

And would the malicious rumours by the McCanns and there friends or Clarence Mitchell about the Pjs or Murat be ok then? Or would that be wrong also?

 

[april4sky]

Respectfully snipped.

The DNA testing does NOT rule out that Madeleine is not dead. If anything, logically speaking, it points strongly to Madeleine's decomposing body being placed in the boot or wheel well of the rented Renault. These DNA tests were ONE marker short of conclusively showing Madeleine's DNA was that found. The only reason the DNA was not matched to Madeleine conclusively was because of the degradation of the material. That means the possibility of the match exists in reality. Identifying anyone else as the donor of the material can be ruled out as no markers were found that did not belong to Madeleine.

Texana the DNA EXPERTS don't agree with you.

And above you left out the Fact that the individual components were not uniquely Madeleine's so those markers could not be confirmed as hers!!

According to the forensic experts 50% of Madeleines profile is shared by each parent.

Also it's a fact that the genetic profiles of the relatives could not be separated.


They could not even confirm when and how the DNA was deposited - or from which type of bodily fluids it came from.


These real FACTS can be confirmed in the Final report.

 

[Refugee]

The several accounts didn't come from the McCanns or their friends. Though missinformation was leaked to discredit them.

And their timeline accounts didn't vary any more than is natural between any group of witnesses.

Texana can you please link confirmation that any of them ever changed their statements. TIA.
As far as I know the final report doesn't support this accusation so I suspect it's just one of the many malicious rumours leaked by the PJ.

Actually, April4sky, the McCanns and the T7 have made many state,emts which contradict. Cleverly (lawyer advised) Kate refused to answer a significant number oif questions and Gerry answered all questions - a typical ploy to avoid caontradiction - and very revealing in itself!

Anyway, here is a documented contradiction, Tanner said she saw the 'baductor' at 9:15 PM, for a long time this was not contradicted. Suddenly on Gerry's blog he stated he had been looking down on Madeleines sleeping form at 9:15! Explain why he'd do that at a time when every word was being carefully selected and filtered through Clarence's media and legal filters?

 

[Refugee]

Unfortunately that's not confirmed. There were several accounts of differeing times, which is one of the reasons the PJ wanted all of the Tapas 9 to re-enact the evening.

The timeline accounts varied and then were changed. I can understand you might infer that doesn't mean the McCanns (or anyone else) was involved in something regarding Madeleine's disappearance, but it does mean the time line is unreliable in terms of ruling them out.

It does not prove their involvement but it does not prove their innocence either.

In my opinion, the scenario we are supposed to believe is nonsense.

We are told that Kate, on finding Madeleine missing, did not take her remaining children to safty - did not stay and guard them either. She is purported to have run back to the bar, shouting 'they've taken her!'

Odd behaviour indeed when she must have known that Jane Tanner was in her apartment...that Jane may have heard Madeleine crying and taken her with her (surely a Mother would grab that possibility?).

Remember, Kate claims to have known that Madeleine cried the night before (though puzzled that a child on her own in a dark foreign apartment might have awoken and been frightened and called for her parents!)

What wonderful parents these people are!

Lets face it, there is a cover up here, most likely due to the position of these people, Gerry associated with Government, Kate associated with politicians.

And who was Dianne Webster there with? 8 thirty somethings and one fifty something - a fifty something not there to baby sit!

The important question is, who was the Tapas 10th?

 

[Refugee]

Respectfully snipped. Texana the DNA EXPERTS don't agree with you.

And above you left out the Fact that the individual components were not uniquely Madeleine's so those markers could not be confirmed as hers!!

According to the forensic experts 50% of Madeleines profile is shared by each parent.

Also it's a fact that the genetic profiles of the relatives could not be separated.


They could not even confirm when and how the DNA was deposited - or from which type of bodily fluids it came from.


These real FACTS can be confirmed in the Final report.

I think we all know that there has been UK Government influence applied.

I think we all know that the forensics have been corrupted.

I think we all know that the dogs dont lie.