Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread #27

[Hexe]

If he disturbed her and it startled him being discovered he could of lashed out and killed her by accident, ala head hitting the floor.

He stores her body in the wardrobe, leaves temporarily to cool off and think what to do next and to double back on himself by walking back around the block carrying MM in a blanket, possibly to conceal head wounds and make it look to anyone else that she's just a sleepy child and exits via the side entrance.

It would help explain the various dog scents.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

But why? If she smashed her head accidentally, all he needed to do would be getting away from the apartment and the blame would have fallen on the careless parents who left the children unsupervised.

 

[Veidt]

Its funny isnt it because the top looks PEACH to me. Peach with blue bottoms could even be a boys not a girls lol.

But without doubt BLUE BOTTOMS and they had a peach/orange trim on the bottom not FRILLY....

Nothing PINK about them well on the bottom anyway.

It does look a bit peach but a pink peach colour... like a light coral color. In the dark it could easily look pink and not everyone is good at describing color with so much nuance. I'm sure that if you ask around what color that is someone sooner or later is going to say something simple like pink instead of going into detail about hues.

The trim IMO could look like a frill as well especially if it wasn't looking completely straight as IMO it's likely, since the child was being carried so it could have been kind of bunched up and looked like a frill from a distance.

The bottom does have pink (or peach call it what you will) flowers or something like that.

If he disturbed her and it startled him being discovered he could of lashed out and killed her by accident, ala head hitting the floor.

He stores her body in the wardrobe, leaves temporarily to cool off and think what to do next and to double back on himself by walking back around the block carrying MM in a blanket, possibly to conceal head wounds and make it look to anyone else that she's just a sleepy child and exits via the side entrance.

It would help explain the various dog scents.

If an abductor killed her and then took her body to conceal any evidence I doubt he would have stored her in the wardrobe and left temporarily... the risk that someone would go in to check, notice she was gone from her bed, and have the place surrounded by police before he could go back was too great IMO.

It wouldn't explain the scents behind the sofa, Kate's clothes, McCanns car etc

It's believed the alleged abductor exited through the window.

I thought the window was undisturbed and the theory is that if there was an abductor, he or she opened the window as a decoy or for another reason but left through the door. Could be wrong though. :waitasec:

 

[~n/t~]

It does look a bit peach but a pink peach colour... like a light coral color. In the dark it could easily look pink and not everyone is good at describing color with so much nuance. I'm sure that if you ask around what color that is someone sooner or later is going to say something simple like pink instead of going into detail about hues.

The trim IMO could look like a frill as well especially if it wasn't looking completely straight as IMO it's likely, since the child was being carried so it could have been kind of bunched up and looked like a frill from a distance.

The bottom does have pink (or peach call it what you will) flowers or something like that.



If an abductor killed her and then took her body to conceal any evidence I doubt he would have stored her in the wardrobe and left temporarily... the risk that someone would go in to check, notice she was gone from her bed, and have the place surrounded by police before he could go back was too great IMO.



I thought the window was undisturbed and the theory is that if there was an abductor, he or she opened the window as a decoy or for another reason but left through the door. Could be wrong though. :waitasec:

The window. I guess we will never truly know.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id31.html

 

[Redgoblin]

It wouldn't explain the scents behind the sofa, Kate's clothes, McCanns car etc

It's believed the alleged abductor exited through the window.

Of course, it wouldn't explain those in the hire car, kate or elsewhere. Not unless TractorMan was also a master car thief as well, or wanted to pin it on the parents, which I don't believe for a minute.

Unless... cross contamination occurred, was there hire car keys in the apartment on the alleged night MM was allegedly taken. If the parents searched high and low in the apartment could they of unwittingly transfered scents to the areas such as behind the sofa?

I think there is so many what ifs, that to rule out either possibility is impossible at least from our point of view.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[haden]

If he disturbed her and it startled him being discovered he could of lashed out and killed her by accident, ala head hitting the floor.

He stores her body in the wardrobe, leaves temporarily to cool off and think what to do next and to double back on himself by walking back around the block carrying MM in a blanket, possibly to conceal head wounds and make it look to anyone else that she's just a sleepy child and exits via the side entrance.

It would help explain the various dog scents.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

There was no cadaver scent, these dogs both also alert to dry blood. ( from the mouth of their trainer)

And Madeleine did hurt herself and was bleeding during this holiday trip.

 

[~n/t~]

Of course, it wouldn't explain those in the hire car, kate or elsewhere. Not unless TractorMan was also a master car thief as well, or wanted to pin it on the parents, which I don't believe for a minute.

Unless... cross contamination occurred, was there hire car keys in the apartment on the alleged night MM was allegedly taken. If the parents searched high and low in the apartment could they of unwittingly transfered scents to the areas such as behind the sofa?

I think there is so many what ifs, that to rule out either possibility is impossible at least from our point of view.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

The car was rented after Madeleine disappeared. I suppose cross contamination is a possibility. I still believe if this was the guy, what an idiot to take off with a dead child and risking getting caught when he could've just left her there. Unless he was a pedophile and his purpose was to rape, kill and take her. That still doesn't make sense to me though.

 

[Morag]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...-is-from-five-year-old-suppressed-report.html

The team of hand-picked former MI5 agents was hired by the McCanns in the spring of 2008, 10 months after their daughter disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz.
A report they produced was “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends and the authors were threatened with legal action if it were ever published, the paper reported.

So their own detectives were hypercritical, and the McCanns (and friends) didn't want anyone to see the criticism, or the "Smith" e-fits. What was in that report? By the time that team of detectives was hired, it was well-known that the Tapas had left their kids alone at night. But was there something else that the 'tecs found out?

I have often thought that there was an alcohol component to this story. And I don't care if the adults were accustomed to party when they vacationed together- that's fine. But if at least some of the adults had pre-dinner drinks, in their apartments, or at the Paraiso beach restaurant, and then a number of bottles of wine were shared over the course of an hour or so- I think it's a fair assumption that some of them were a little tipsy, if not worse. It must have been very difficult for them to go from party mode to panic mode in just a minute's time. So it might be that the detectives took the trouble to investigate the drinking patterns of the friends.

Yet- what did those detectives uncover, and then write up, that was so sensitive? Or was it just that they were all doctors (and I think one or two were 'between jobs') and feared being known as drunken child-neglectors?
Was there something else? What did the report say that was so much worse than what was already known?

 

[~n/t~]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...-is-from-five-year-old-suppressed-report.html

The team of hand-picked former MI5 agents was hired by the McCanns in the spring of 2008, 10 months after their daughter disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz.
A report they produced was “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends and the authors were threatened with legal action if it were ever published, the paper reported.

So their own detectives were hypercritical, and the McCanns (and friends) didn't want anyone to see the criticism, or the "Smith" e-fits. What was in that report? By the time that team of detectives was hired, it was well-known that the Tapas had left their kids alone at night. But was there something else that the 'tecs found out?

I have often thought that there was an alcohol component to this story. And I don't care if the adults were accustomed to party when they vacationed together- that's fine. But if at least some of the adults had pre-dinner drinks, in their apartments, or at the Paraiso beach restaurant, and then a number of bottles of wine were shared over the course of an hour or so- I think it's a fair assumption that some of them were a little tipsy, if not worse. It must have been very difficult for them to go from party mode to panic mode in just a minute's time. So it might be that the detectives took the trouble to investigate the drinking patterns of the friends.

Yet- what did those detectives uncover, and then write up, that was so sensitive? Or was it just that they were all doctors (and I think one or two were 'between jobs') and feared being known as drunken child-neglectors?
Was there something else? What did the report say that was so much worse than what was already known?

I believe one was the current efits and the smiths recognizing Gerry as the man carrying a child. My understanding is Scotland Yard now has the reports.

 

[Morag]

I believe one was the current efits and the smiths recognizing Gerry as the man carrying a child. My understanding is Scotland Yard now has the reports.

Yes, I knew that they didn't want that e-fit out there! But on what grounds were they threatening to sue? Perhaps they felt they owned the 'work product'?

I was interested in this case from the first day, and I continue to hope that the truth will come out.

 

[~n/t~]

Yes, I knew that they didn't want that e-fit out there! But on what grounds were they threatening to sue? Perhaps they felt they owned the 'work product'?

I was interested in this case from the first day, and I continue to hope that the truth will come out.

Who knows. They sue everyone.

 

[Pisces Cloud]

I believe one was the current efits and the smiths recognizing Gerry as the man carrying a child. My understanding is Scotland Yard now has the reports.

How many of them actually mentioned Gerry? I thought it was one guy and that was about the way he carried the child. Not exactly reliable. Either way, those pictures look nothing like each other if they're supposed to be of the same person. I personally think Madeleine was probably already gone by the time of that sighting, anyway.

 

[~n/t~]

How many of them actually mentioned Gerry? I thought it was one guy and that was about the way he carried the child. Not exactly reliable. Either way, those pictures look nothing like each other if they're supposed to be of the same person. I personally think Madeleine was probably already gone by the time of that sighting, anyway.

We know of one. What is in that report remains sealed unless SY releases it so there could have been others as well. There must've been a reason why those efits weren't released earlier. I can only speculate that the public may have recognized him as Gerry.

 

[Pisces Cloud]

We know of one. What is in that report remains sealed unless SY releases it so there could have been others as well. There must've been a reason why those efits weren't released earlier. I can only speculate that the public may have recognized him as Gerry.

I think that person described Gerry's face mainly because of the way he saw the man in question carry the child and that seems wrong to me. It would also be interesting to learn if he visited any of the online sites discussing this case in the time between his statements. That could have influenced him too.

 

[Redgoblin]

Redgoblin;9942638


:floorlaugh:Seriously? That whole elaborate explanation makes sense? Why would he need to cool off? He just killed her, he isn't likely to get any "hotter" than that.

Why would he carry her around the block? She's dead. Why wouldn't he just leave her there to take his little stroll. Because, really, who doesn't like a good stroll immediately after committing murder?




What? The dog scents that all of the IDI's have already discounted, because, obviously, they have to in order to make the IDI fairy tale work.
Now IDI's are going to start explaining it.:scared::scared:

If he killed her by accident being only a humble robber, he would need time to think about what to do after. Cooling off doesn't refer to him physically cooling off.

Going around the block (if you look at the pictures of the scent trail) - He may of done this, as going out the front door would attract more attention if you take the shortest route to the right because in order to walk down the hill one has to walk through the carpark at the front of the building as more appartments overlook it.

Staying close to the building and walking around the block allows him to be seen by potentially less people.
I'm not putting this forward because I want to dismiss the idea of parental involvement, more fleshing out alternatives given the latest info on TractorMan.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Redgoblin]

So... to clarify, TM exits through the front door with a dead MM wrapped in a blanket, walks around the front but not through the front carpark as to be seen by anyone above ground floor level, walks around the block to the back of the building and exits down the steps and through the side exit.



Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Hexe]

So... to clarify, TM exits through the front door with a dead MM wrapped in a blanket, walks around the front but not through the front carpark as to be seen by anyone above ground floor level, walks around the block to the back of the building and exits down the steps and through the side exit.

Walking by the back of the building he would have risked bumping into someone from Tapas 9. As far as I remember not only the McCanns used the patio door to pop in and check on the kids.

And I still don't know why TM would take Maddie's body after the failed burglary, instead of getting his rear end away from there, ASAP.

 

[Redgoblin]

Walking by the back of the building he would have risked bumping into someone from Tapas 9. As far as I remember not only the McCanns used the patio door to pop in and check on the kids.

And I still don't know why TM would take Maddie's body after the failed burglary, instead of getting his rear end away from there, ASAP.

That is true, there is an element of risk to all of it, one way he could of taken her was to make sure it looked like an abduction, he may of just wanted to cover his tracks or was panicked at the events that had just transpired. He might not of wanted the prospect of a murder charge, no body no murder perhaps?



Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[hoshizora]

Walking by the back of the building he would have risked bumping into someone from Tapas 9. As far as I remember not only the McCanns used the patio door to pop in and check on the kids.

And I still don't know why TM would take Maddie's body after the failed burglary, instead of getting his rear end away from there, ASAP.

Not only that, but also to put the body in the wardrobe and then behind the couch as indicated by the dogs. it just seems so unlikely.

 

[Redgoblin]

Not only that, but also to put the body in the wardrobe and then behind the couch as indicated by the dogs. it just seems so unlikely.

The dogs didn't find a body only scent, so therefore with the Tapas9 walking all over the crime scene there could be cross contamination as well as cross contamination of MMs scent on TM and as so on.

I agree with your point though that if you exclude cross contamination, it does seem implausible.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Redgoblin]

And no I'm not saying the Tapas 9 walked in the wardrobe

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk