Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread #27

[Cherwell]

While looking for the diagram, I came across this Evening Standard report from 2008 which features two more e-fits provided by different witnesses.
First time I've seen these. These people have probably been traced and eliminated.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/coul...l-the-efits-the-public-never-saw-6848973.html

Even though either of the men in these images could have abducted Madeleine, Portuguese police did not release them during the investigation.
Both pictures show two men who are both in their late-20s to early 30s and who both have medium-length dark hair.
The e-fits of the two male suspects were not released at the time.

The image on the left was created with the help of British tourist Derek Flack, from Ilford, Essex.
The photo of the man with a side parting and slightly longer hair was provided with the help of a Portuguese man, according to the files.

 

[nomoresorrow]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aedophiles-let-live-home-released-prison.html

Good Samaritan 'questioned by Maddie police over pair of paedophiles he let live in his home after they were released from prison'

Thanks for posting this haden. Very interesting and, IMO, there is a remarkable resemblance between the e-fits and Charles O'Neill (left) and William Lauchlan (right)...

ETA: By the way, I've agreed all along that the e-fits did not/do not look like the same individual.

 

[goldengirl57]

This is from Matthew Oldfield questioning, from Madeleine Files

Erm.....

 

[haden]

from the article I posted above

Officers are analysing mobile phone data of people in Praia da Luz on the day Maddie went missing, in bid to build a case against child sex offenders who feature in the inquiry.
They are also looking at credit card and bank transactions of these potential suspects to see if it proves where they were around the time she went missing.



Mention of the credit cards and bank transactions is quite interesting too..

Mobile phone data and money transactions can still be analysed.. I wonder how many people they can outline like this.. statistically meaning..

If they for example have 50 people pinging the areas mobile phone they can as well possibly have their photos and their whole life analysed.

Interesting article on how the mobile phone whereabouts can be located.

http://pursuitmag.com/locating-mobile-phones-through-pinging-and-triangulation/

Interesting thing about mobile phones is that they can be listened to even if they are switched off, they can be turned into a radio and transmit the conversation of the people next to them.
It was mentioned that Edward Snowden has asked everyone in the room in Hong Kong to put their mobile phones into the fridge as only if they were in the fridge they cannot be listened to..

 

[~n/t~]

Thanks for posting this haden. Very interesting and, IMO, there is a remarkable resemblance between the e-fits and Charles O'Neill (left) and William Lauchlan (right)...

ETA: By the way, I've agreed all along that the e-fits did not/do not look like the same individual.

I don't know who these men are so I did a quick google search and it appears they are homosexuals and their victims boys. Is that correct? If so I don't think they'd be interested in a little girl. Imo

 

[goldengirl57]

Thanks for posting this haden. Very interesting and, IMO, there is a remarkable resemblance between the e-fits and Charles O'Neill (left) and William Lauchlan (right)...

ETA: By the way, I've agreed all along that the e-fits did not/do not look like the same individual.

Yes thanks Haden, i have been racking my brains over the name of the pedophiles.

When i found a photo i thought one looked like gerry.

The problem is they were spoken to at length in 2011 and nothing came of it. I do think though they are guilty of killing that child who went missing in the Canarys they never found his body.

But a good find.

The thing is the Efit is for ONE PERSON not two....

IF they were in PDL on the 3rd then I would certainly put them in the frame even though they had a thing about boys from 6 years old.

Good find though, well done. Been bugging me for 2 weeks.:loveyou:

 

[~n/t~]

This is from Matthew Oldfield questioning, from Madeleine Files

Wish they confirmed a time when this was going on. Very confusing

 

[nomoresorrow]

I don't know who these men are so I did a quick google search and it appears they are homosexuals and their victims boys. Is that correct? If so I don't think they'd be interested in a little girl. Imo

Not necessarily n/t. As we know, pedophiles often "network" with one another so it would not be out of the question that they may have taken Maddie for someone else in their "network" for a fee. Additonally, although the offenses they were caught/convicted for involved male victims, that does not 100% rule out that they did not also offend female victims. JMO~

 

[~n/t~]

While looking for the diagram, I came across this Evening Standard report from 2008 which features two more e-fits provided by different witnesses.
First time I've seen these. These people have probably been traced and eliminated.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/coul...l-the-efits-the-public-never-saw-6848973.html

Looks like the tanner efit. The dark haired man carrying a child

 

[goldengirl57]

Interesting head lines, and shows how things can read totally differently from the truth.

http://www.anorak.co.uk/357218/made...-child-crying-at-night-and-went-to-help.html/

 

[Meteor]

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.

What makes you think SY are satisfied she was abducted and how do you know they are not investigating a murder or accidental death?

 

[gord]

What makes you think SY are satisfied she was abducted and how do you know they are not investigating a murder or accidental death?

Well mainly because that is what they told us. SY will investigate where the hard evidence takes them. They will also use latest techniques to trace patterns in phone calls and look at all known possibilities. Do you really think that if there was any hard evidence out there that thr parents were involved they wouldn't have acted ?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Salem]

That's ok . As I understand the thing about warners chasing them to get back to look after crying children is one of these myths that grew over the years. I would be happy to be proved otherwise if domeone can find a witness statement in the files.
The mcanns volunteered the info regarding maddy crying the night before pretty early in statements. I dont think they were trying to hide anything

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

This is not a myth according to MSM. There are several articles that were written at the time and it has been discussed in depth here, in Maddie's forum. Did MSM get it wrong? Well you have to decide that for yourself. But, it was well reported that the neighbor complained to staff and staff sent someone to the bar down the street to fetch the McCanns. Kate, herself, gives weight to the story when she tells about Maddie asking her why she (Kate) did not come when Maddie was crying for her.

I think there is an entire thread on this information.

Salem

 

[Cherwell]

Looks like the tanner efit. The dark haired man carrying a child

I thought Tanner never saw his face.

There's no indication in the article of when or where these men were seen by the witnesses though.

 

[Cherwell]

The mcanns volunteered the info regarding maddy crying the night before pretty early in statements. I dont think they were trying to hide anything

I would say that they were in no position to deny it, and they knew it.

 

[gord]

This is not a myth according to MSM. There are several articles that were written at the time and it has been discussed in depth here, in Maddie's forum. Did MSM get it wrong? Well you have to decide that for yourself. But, it was well reported that the neighbor complained to staff and staff sent someone to the bar down the street to fetch the McCanns. Kate, herself, gives weight to the story when she tells about Maddie asking her why she (Kate) did not come when Maddie was crying for her.

I think there is an entire thread on this information.

Salem

MSM at the time got a lot wrong. It got so much wrong that in the end they paid out. If this is an official staff statement it should have appeared on the files. I havent yet seen it. Mrs Fenn did make a statement about hearing crying . That is in the files. But mostly what appeared in the newspapers around 2007/2008 was sensationalist and not based on fact. So to answer your question no I don't really trust what was written in the newspapers. Especially not uk tabs

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[haden]

This is not a myth according to MSM. There are several articles that were written at the time and it has been discussed in depth here, in Maddie's forum. Did MSM get it wrong? Well you have to decide that for yourself. But, it was well reported that the neighbor complained to staff and staff sent someone to the bar down the street to fetch the McCanns. Kate, herself, gives weight to the story when she tells about Maddie asking her why she (Kate) did not come when Maddie was crying for her.

I think there is an entire thread on this information.

Salem

Are these 'reports' from the valuable sources?
What is MSM?
Are there any links from the files to prove the neighbours called the resort workers and the resort workers contacted the family?
There should be witnesses to this, like the waiters, receptions staff etc.., I read the staff reports and no one has mentioned this.

 

[Meteor]

Well mainly because that is what they told us. SY will investigate where the hard evidence takes them. They will also use latest techniques to trace patterns in phone calls and look at all known possibilities. Do you really think that if there was any hard evidence out there that thr parents were involved they wouldn't have acted ?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Which is the strongest evidence, two police dogs indicating foul play, KM refusing to answer 48 out of 49 questions concerning her missing daughter or a massive media/Government backed campaign telling the police and everyone else Maddy was abducted. Police are frightened to death of the McCann legal team.
The dog thing that everyone keeps mentioning: Before the McCann case these dogs were the best thing since sliced bread, after August 2007 they were suddenly unreliable. Which is it to be? Did these dogs solve 200 cases and the FBI are interested in the way they are trained or are Eddie and Keela a pile of crap? You can't have it both ways, we either trust the dogs which are licensed for this work or we don't.
Everyone is frightened to death of the McCann legal team because of the previous law suits they've dished out.
It has gotten to the state where no one dare point the finger at them and that my friend in as far as democracy and law are concerned is a very dangerous position to be in for all of us.

 

[gord]

MSM is main stream media . Not sure what clarifies as main stream media any how

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Pisces Cloud]

MSM is main stream media . Not sure what clarifies as main stream media any how

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

It's surprising what they can get wrong and misreport. I remember I first noticed that being apparent during the Joanna Yeates case. Unless they quote directly from those involved and the police it's best to take with a pinch of salt or at best acknowledge that what they report might not be the true facts.