Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread #27

[Linda7NJ]

SS, I saw the documentary Amaral did for a TV station, and he pointed out that all the Tapas group who checked on the McCann kids used the long route to go check on them. He said there was a shorter way (I guess by the pool), which none of them used....instead they went around and to the side.

Do you know the significance of that and what might that mean? TIA to anyone.

That's very very odd indeed!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[SapphireSteel]

Same old story, the best defence is offence.

If there's questions you can't answer, truths you don't want to contemplate, just start mud slinging. The more the better, some of it sticks.

:sigh:

 

[SapphireSteel]

That's very very odd indeed!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Not really. Once they started lying about window shutters being forced, they'd backed themselves into a corner.

If they say they went around the front, it explains why no one noticed the window being open.

But they said they went around the front using a key, then later admitted it was the back which was unlocked.

The story changed=lies.

One lie led to another to another. So they lawyered up and refused to speak then left the country.

The PJ closed the investigation because they could not take it any further without their cooperation, and personally, I don't blame them.

The English Tourists from Hell...losing their kid then blaming everyone else for it...

It is always useful to remember, NO CRIMINAL EXPECTS TO GET CAUGHT. They are all smarter than everyone else, they don't actually do or say things with the assumption they're being investigated. They are cocky.

:cow:

 

[Cappuccino]

Same old story, the best defence is offence.

If there's questions you can't answer, truths you don't want to contemplate, just start mud slinging. The more the better, some of it sticks.

:sigh:

Of course. When you have cadaver dogs which can only produce presumptive evidence which, according to the scientific literature, varies between 40 - 50 % accuracy, when you have LCD results on DNA samples which are from between 3 - 5 people, what else can you do?

Sling mud at the victim's parents.

You certainly can't arrest them. Not if you're actual law enforcement, that is. Not if your mud slinging would have, one day, to stand up in a court of law.

 

[goldengirl57]

No, they were not. And they were not in charge.
Mr Amaral was in charge of this investigation and he failed to do the main things every modern police force would do.

Secure the apartment straight away
Check for the DNA straight away, bed sheets, clothing in the room, cord of shutters being open.. Nothing of this was done.
Check for the all available CCTV cameras in the LITTLE town
Stop the bin bags being collected.
Check the the nursery for all potential passers by with children that night.
Alert all the mobile phone companies and request the data.
All of this should have been done in the morning of the day2

Instead he imagined he was inspector Poirot from the 1950s book ))))

Firstly the GNR were the ones who went to assist the british couple whos child was MISSING.

They had no idea at the time i was an ABDUCTION, merely that the child could have wondered off....

They immediately put in motion searches for the child, some of the british ex patts were there all night looking for her. EVERYONE assumed it was a child walkabout. ABDUCTION simply did not happen in a quiet respectful town like Praia Da Luz.

ALSO one musnt remember the McCanns friends also turned up into the apartment and ran around looking AGAIN and again just in case they missed her hiding the first time. The apartment was totally compromised by lots of people from the get go BEFORE THE POLICE GRN arrived.

It was later that the lead detectives and police were brought in.

OH and something I do find odd Haden is that with all this shouting and calling for Maddy Jane Tanner never heard a thing, I believe she was woken up or something and told maddy had gone missing...then she joined the hunt and then remembered and relayed she thought she saw someone carrying a child......

 

[goldengirl57]

Even if they had found this man- eggman- on day 2, what difference would it have made? He had nothing to do with it. It's not as though they spent 6 years, day and night, looking only for this person to the exclusion of all others. Looking for the man the Smith family saw would have been a better bet.

I believe from what i have read way back in 2008 the PJ had already discounted the sighting as false. They were concentraing on the smith sighting but this changed when Amaral was removed from the case and it went FLAT, almost as though the Smiths had disappeared from the earth....because they had mentioned it looked like Gerry.

The mcCanns own detectives Metodo 3 did an efit of this man way back then and no one came forward........

 

[Meteor]

If Madeleine has been replaced by another Madeleine, all of the McCanns friends are lying for them, chidcare staff being stupid and not realising it is another child they are having.. How this would be possible? So where is the 'other' Madeleine now? How come they so quickly found another similar girl with the same name?

Hi Haden,
I never suggested there was another Maddy. I suggested that because there was such a long period of time before the Tapas nine became suspects, things have become clouded. I said perhaps the staff at the kids club confused O'Brien's daughter Ella with Maddy. Perhaps Maddy never attended the kids club that day at all and was already dead.
The McCann's behavior on the 3rd was different from the rest of the holiday and they broke from routine for a reason. In Fact the entire group acted differently on the 3rd before Maddy was reported missing. That leads me to suspect something was already amiss.

 

[Pisces Cloud]

BBM. I'm not disagreeing, I'm currently undecided. BUT, IMO Occam's Razor goes right out the window if one believes that the cadaver dog hits are proof that MDI. It is very hard to explain the cadaver dog hitting in the trunk of the Renault, a vehicle that the Mccanns had no access to until at least two weeks after her disappearance. I have mentioned this before but despite many here supporting this, nobody has been willing to share a reasonable explanation or theory.

One would have to assume that Maddie's body was hidden somewhere on the 3rd, left to decay until over 2 weeks later, then retrieved, placed in the back of the Renault, and dumped somewhere, all without LE, media, Warner staff, friends/family, etc being aware. The risk would be enormous. If one considers that Maddie's body had been refrigerated/frozen during that time span, there compounds and complicates the scenario even further.

IMO, MOO... Something about that cadaver dog hit in the Renault just nags at me.

I think some people are putting too much faith in the dogs. I think even the handler said something along the lines that it wasn't an exact science and shouldn't be taken as complete proof. I also think it's very wrong for people to be interfering with the police investigation, because they couldn't possibly know the full details of the case as truly as those at Scotland Yard will. Posting theories and what-not on internet forums is one thing, but trying to meddle in the actual case of a missing child is quite another.

 

[gord]

I can see that views remain firmly entrenched in the two camps. They either did it or they didn't. If you go back and look at posts from 6 years ago it was the same points same arguments. Nothing has moved on. I do agree that until we either find a body or find a live maddy or get a signed confession then things will remain as they are.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Meteor]

I think some people are putting too much faith in the dogs. I think even the handler said something along the lines that it wasn't an exact science and shouldn't be taken as complete proof. I also think it's very wrong for people to be interfering with the police investigation, because they couldn't possibly know the full details of the case as truly as those at Scotland Yard will. Posting theories and what-not on internet forums is one thing, but trying to meddle in the actual case of a missing child is quite another.

Posting misinformation and trying to force public opinion away from the truth could also be regarded as meddling in the case though, don't you agree Pisces?

 

[Pisces Cloud]

Posting misinformation and trying to force public opinion away from the truth could also be regarded as meddling in the case though, don't you agree Pisces?

I trust Scotland Yard to know what they're doing with regards to investigating this case. I just don't believe that contacting them with crack-pot theories is going to help matters. I wonder how many people wasted their time with regards to the Tanner sighting, yet, it turns out that they believe that she did see a guy carrying a child. If SY are satisfied that Madeleine was abducted from her apartment then I don't really understand why people who are unconnected to the case think that they know better than them.

 

[goldengirl57]

My abduction theory, please feel free to shred it lol...

Before the McCanns and their friends went to PDL they had other holidays together, I am sure one was Portugal. I read somewhere that they made a pact on the next holiday they would do a listening service each one of them taking turns to check the children each night, by listening at the door, which is what the holiday resort they were staying at offered, and I suppose their thinking was why pay for it when you can do it yourself.

Anyway, they arrived and settled in, and started their rota. No one has any idea what they did or where they were really from the day they arrived to the 3rd May.

So one would assume that up to the 2nd May this checking routine worked really well.

So what changed on the 3rd May?

Simples. The children belonging to the McCanns were heard to be crying for well over an hour late at night to the point where the Ocean club staff were informed, and the McCanns I believe were told to go back to their apartment and sort their children out.

This is borne out by Mrs McCann saying that she was chastised by her daughter on the 3rd May for not being there when she woke up.....

I believe that because of this incident and being perhaps being gently told off by the Ocean management about leaving children for long periods and it being their last night together they decided to give the children a sedative to make them sleep.

Nothing bad just Calpol or phenergan lots of parents use these things to settle children to sleep although they can have the opposite effect. It was mooted that Maddy was pale and tired, well yes she would be if she had been crying for hours the night before. We dont know how long she really had been awake for do we so a sedative would probably have worked very quickly.

I think the children soon went to sleep allowing the parents to go out for dinner and be with their friends.

For me, the abductor had been watching and knew an approximate time line. Logically for me if I was going to go in and take the child i would within 5/10 minutes of the parents leaving.

So at about 8.40 the abductor goes quietly into the apartment from the front door. Its not rocket science to get keys copied even unusual ones. I dont buy the patio door as access as it was visible to a certain extent by the Tapas area, and other people could be walking past on the way to the Ocean Club.

The front door was in the dark and close to the car park.

I dont believe the shutters were up or used either. Didnt GM check to see if they could be open from the outside. The idea of these shutters is for security so hardly would be ideal if they could be lifted from the outside. As they were on the ground floor if that had been me using that apartment the shutters would remain closed just slightly extended during the day for air but still in the shut position if that makes sense.

So the abductor goes in quickly, locates the childrens room and takes the child away who is heavily asleep not touching ANYTHING.

Checks quickly outside to see if anyone is walking about, then slips out quickly, and to the left away from PDL and a parked car.

Now you say how can this be how can she have been taken early because GM said he saw her at 9.10 asleep....

DID HE?

The group had agreed a listening service. Listening service is just that, you listen at the door. The only thing you need to do is open the patio door very slightly and listen. All is quiet so you go back down the steps bump into a friend and start to chat on the opposite side of the road.

Now its twighlight and getting dark and two men are engrossed in conversation. I can actually believe they never saw JT walk past on the other side of the road.

So enters Jane Tanner who walks along minding her own business sees someone walking along in front of her takes no notice, goes and checks her child as she was sick, this is the only reason why she was checking herself then goes back to the bar.

The other check on the children was again listening only by MO.

It was only when Mrs McCann went to check she noticed something off, and went into the room or maybe it was her instincts....and found the child missing....

The child would have been gone nearly 1.5 hours miles away from PDL.

So my theory falls down because of Gerry McCanns statement he saw her. NOW if this was untrue it would all make sense.

IS the reason why they come over so odd because of the guilt, because they didnt really check properly and because they had sedated her making it easier for someone to lift her and take her away?

I just do not buy the fact an abductor would risk walking around later as more people are out and about even going out for dinner at 9pm etc.....

Obviously it cant work if Gerry did see the child asleep...but that is purely hearsay.

 

[~n/t~]

My abduction theory, please feel free to shred it lol...

Before the McCanns and their friends went to PDL they had other holidays together, I am sure one was Portugal. I read somewhere that they made a pact on the next holiday they would do a listening service each one of them taking turns to check the children each night, by listening at the door, which is what the holiday resort they were staying at offered, and I suppose their thinking was why pay for it when you can do it yourself.

Anyway, they arrived and settled in, and started their rota. No one has any idea what they did or where they were really from the day they arrived to the 3rd May.

So one would assume that up to the 2nd May this checking routine worked really well.

So what changed on the 3rd May?

Simples. The children belonging to the McCanns were heard to be crying for well over an hour late at night to the point where the Ocean club staff were informed, and the McCanns I believe were told to go back to their apartment and sort their children out.

This is borne out by Mrs McCann saying that she was chastised by her daughter on the 3rd May for not being there when she woke up.....

I believe that because of this incident and being perhaps being gently told off by the Ocean management about leaving children for long periods and it being their last night together they decided to give the children a sedative to make them sleep.

Nothing bad just Calpol or phenergan lots of parents use these things to settle children to sleep although they can have the opposite effect. It was mooted that Maddy was pale and tired, well yes she would be if she had been crying for hours the night before. We dont know how long she really had been awake for do we so a sedative would probably have worked very quickly.

I think the children soon went to sleep allowing the parents to go out for dinner and be with their friends.

For me, the abductor had been watching and knew an approximate time line. Logically for me if I was going to go in and take the child i would within 5/10 minutes of the parents leaving.

So at about 8.40 the abductor goes quietly into the apartment from the front door. Its not rocket science to get keys copied even unusual ones. I dont buy the patio door as access as it was visible to a certain extent by the Tapas area, and other people could be walking past on the way to the Ocean Club.

The front door was in the dark and close to the car park.

I dont believe the shutters were up or used either. Didnt GM check to see if they could be open from the outside. The idea of these shutters is for security so hardly would be ideal if they could be lifted from the outside. As they were on the ground floor if that had been me using that apartment the shutters would remain closed just slightly extended during the day for air but still in the shut position if that makes sense.

So the abductor goes in quickly, locates the childrens room and takes the child away who is heavily asleep not touching ANYTHING.

Checks quickly outside to see if anyone is walking about, then slips out quickly, and to the left away from PDL and a parked car.

Now you say how can this be how can she have been taken early because GM said he saw her at 9.10 asleep....

DID HE?

The group had agreed a listening service. Listening service is just that, you listen at the door. The only thing you need to do is open the patio door very slightly and listen. All is quiet so you go back down the steps bump into a friend and start to chat on the opposite side of the road.

Now its twighlight and getting dark and two men are engrossed in conversation. I can actually believe they never saw JT walk past on the other side of the road.

So enters Jane Tanner who walks along minding her own business sees someone walking along in front of her takes no notice, goes and checks her child as she was sick, this is the only reason why she was checking herself then goes back to the bar.

The other check on the children was again listening only by MO.

It was only when Mrs McCann went to check she noticed something off, and went into the room or maybe it was her instincts....and found the child missing....

The child would have been gone nearly 1.5 hours miles away from PDL.

So my theory falls down because of Gerry McCanns statement he saw her. NOW if this was untrue it would all make sense.

IS the reason why they come over so odd because of the guilt, because they didnt really check properly and because they had sedated her making it easier for someone to lift her and take her away?

I just do not buy the fact an abductor would risk walking around later as more people are out and about even going out for dinner at 9pm etc.....

Obviously it cant work if Gerry did see the child asleep...but that is purely hearsay.

Good theory but do your actually believe the abductor had a key made to abduct Madeleine?

Personally I don't believe they checked on the children as often as they say they did..

Let's not forget they had access to nightime caregiving services but for whatever reason they didn't use it. Why?

 

[jigzy]

Although Jane Tanner's bundleman exists according to recently released info, how can one explain the fact that (if Jane's observation of the direction he was walking in is correct) then he was walking TOWARDS the night crèche rather than away from it?

 

[Cherwell]

The British have now illustrated that timeline simply doesn't work. The parents had to have seen the abductor, there is absolutely no way around that incredibly important fact now.

Why do you say that they "had to have seen the abductor"? I can't follow your reasoning.

I asked you this before - see Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread #27 - Page 11 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[Cherwell]

Although Jane Tanner's bundleman exists according to recently released info, how can one explain the fact that (if Jane's observation of the direction he was walking in is correct) then he was walking TOWARDS the night crèche rather than away from it?

If she definitely said that the man she saw was going in the opposite direction, then it can't be the person who has been identified. But the police would have picked that up straight away. Are you sure there hasn't been a misunderstanding somewhere? perhaps reported wrongly by one source and then repeated?

 

[goldengirl57]

Good theory but do your actually believe the abductor had a key made to abduct Madeleine?

Personally I don't believe they checked on the children as often as they say they did..

Let's not forget they had access to nightime caregiving services but for whatever reason they didn't use it. Why?

Because they did agree they wouldnt. This was documented somewhere where they made the pact of LS only on their next Portuguese holiday. I think they assumed every ocean club is the same but this one in PDL is not, some of the apartments have access outside of the perimeter not really suitable at all for LS and this is why Ocean Club did not offer it.

Yes the key is a sticking point, but let us assume that if this was an active ring, they had insider help. I used to work in a large hotel, was their head housekeeper, keys were often left dangling outside in locks.....

Its only a theory, but your comments are good ones thank you.

 

[goldengirl57]

Although Jane Tanner's bundleman exists according to recently released info, how can one explain the fact that (if Jane's observation of the direction he was walking in is correct) then he was walking TOWARDS the night crèche rather than away from it?

Yes I picked up on that, and was told he was DROPPING his child off to the creche...it was open until 11pm so could be a late meal....

But if not he was walking in the wrong direction.

 

[Cherwell]

Because they did agree they wouldnt. This was documented somewhere where they made the pact of LS only on their next Portuguese holiday. I think they assumed every ocean club is the same but this one in PDL is not, some of the apartments have access outside of the perimeter not really suitable at all for LS and this is why Ocean Club did not offer it.

I don't see the need for a "pact", or why they should all have to agree to do the same. In fact, didn't one of the other couples bring their own baby alarm so that they didn't actually need to leave the restaurant to do their listening?

 

[Hexe]

I disagree, they look to me like impressions of the same man by two separate witnesses, one of whom saw him from a slightly different angle. The main difference is in the shape of the face. One of the e-fits looks cut off at an angle. My guess is that this witness didn't get such a clear view of the lower part of the man's face because it was obscured by his collar or neckline.

I did a little side by side of O'Brien and the e-fit dude.

The eyes, the noses, a lot of resemblance here, IMO.