Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 24

[SleuthMom]

Too right Sleuthmom but then when did Gerry ever say anything that made sense or remotely resembled the truth?

What do you mean? Weren't they dinning in the Restaurant that it's like dinning in your garden? :shakehead:

 

[Barnaby]

What do you mean? Weren't they dinning in the Restaurant that it's like dinning in your garden? :shakehead:

Oh of course LOL! Very honest people!

 

[twinkiesmom]

twinkiesmon,

All your points seem valid and well made to me.

By the way, were you aware that the twins were also IVF?

Here's the article I was thinking of - a controversial one penned by Lori Campbell who had parallel accounts in the 'Independent' and in the 'Sunday Mirror' (dumbed-down version for 'Mirror' readers!) on 5 August 2007.

I will bold the passages which made me wonder about the pregnancy. I think the couple were in Holland during the 9 months before Madeleine was born:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

QUOTE FROM KATE McCANN TALKING TO LORI CAMPBELL, 5 AUGUST 2007 IN 'THE INDEPENDENT'

The one thing I have always been definite about is that I wanted to be a mother. Then when we were trying for a baby and it wasn't happening, it was really hard. The longer it went on, the harder it was. I saw my friends having children and I was really delighted for them, but it made me feel sad too.

We tried unsuccessfully for several years to conceive. There came a point when we admitted we needed help. I was so desperate to have a child I'd try anything. I know IVF isn't everyone's choice, but I wanted to try it.

By that stage I was happy to start the treatment because it was taking the pressure off us a bit. We had one unsuccessful attempt before Madeleine, and that was very hard. But when I got pregnant with Madeleine it was just fantastic. It didn't seem true. I did a test at home so I could handle the result if it wasn't good. I was looking at it thinking 'I don't believe that'. Then I went to the hospital and they checked it. I was really excited.

Madeleine's birth

Once we were past 12 weeks we were telling everyone. I swam every day until the day she was born to keep us both healthy. It was a really uncomplicated pregnancy. I had no sickness, nothing. It was so easy. I didn't know I was having a girl until she was born. [She smiles] There she was, perfect. She was lovely. She had the most beautiful face. I'd thought I was going to have a boy, just based on instinct. That actually made it even more special that she was a girl.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I forgot to post that I did have an email penpal at the time who was going through UK IVF...It did seem like the British system forced long waiting times and treatments were rationed...maybe Holland was a shortcut for Kate or offered better statistics on outcome?

I don't know about Kate's quote...but compared to the twins' pregnancy/delivery, maybe Madeleine's was a snap?

Some of their comments betray a deep-seated resentment towards Madeleine...the colic was likely an inauspicious start to her life.

 

[twinkiesmom]

I haven't followed this case closely enough to have a strong opinion on what happened BUT it's very hard to swallow a conspiracy where several people must all keep a secret on such a death. That just defies logic to me. I've seen such theories bandied about in cases and can't think of anytime that has ended up being the solution.

The cases where the truth comes out immediately usually involves teenagers bragging or talking nervously about the crime.

I presume a group of middle-aged doctors would be better able to keep a secret (if sufficiently motivated to do so) than high schoolers.

As an alternative to possible Tapas 9 involvement in the crime, the group may have its own secrets they don't want told that have nothing to do with Madeleine, and their silence is just quid pro quo.

 

[Texana]

The cases where the truth comes out immediately usually involves teenagers bragging or talking nervously about the crime.

I presume a group of middle-aged doctors would be better able to keep a secret (if sufficiently motivated to do so) than high schoolers.

As an alternative to possible Tapas 9 involvement in the crime, the group may have its own secrets they don't want told that have nothing to do with Madeleine, and their silence is just quid pro quo.

I agree.

Many years ago, before we were married, Mr. Texana called after midnight, quite shook up. Seemed there'd been a shooting at his apartment complex. A group of people were down at the hot tub/pool area, when one man became enraged at another, went and got his gun, shot the other man dead.

Every single person in that group claimed they could not identify the shooter, had never seen him before, could not even so much as give a description of the shooter.

People have many reasons for not telling the truth about a crime, and they do not have to necessarily have the same reason for not telling the entire truth.

I suspect with the McCanns, anyone else involved identified with the McCanns in the personal sense, and saw themselves as the possible victims of an inept, punitive foreign authority. They then went along with the McCanns because they saw them as victims deserving of protection.

 

[april4sky]

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53176&page=17

snipped!

“…………………………………………

Gerry explains disappearance with paedophilia

Only a few hours after Maddie disappeared from Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, her father, Gerry McCann, said during a phone conversation that the little English girl, then aged three, had been the victim of a sequestration by a paedophile network. Gerry’s words were later narrated to the Polícia Judiciária by another English citizen who was on holidays at the Ocean Club. This tourist listened to the phone call, without his presence being noticed by Gerry………………………………….”!


Why would Gerry presume this after just a few hours? Most peculiar!

Why would you assume this statement is true?
Is there any confirmation? Or is it just a repeat of a SMEAR?

 

[april4sky]

tuppence wrote "I haven't followed this case closely enough to have a strong opinion on what happened BUT it's very hard to swallow a conspiracy where several people must all keep a secret on such a death".

++++++

REPLY: tuppence, I spent 18 months investigating the death of Stuart Lubbock at Michaal Barrymore's house in 2001 (and wrote a book on the case). Nine people were there that evening. Stuart died, that leaves eight.

Every single one of those eight knows what happened to Stuart, but won't say. At the Coroner's Inquest in 2002, the lady Coroner referred to a 'wall of silence' that had prevented the truth from coming out. Maybe that reminds you of the 'Tapas 9's 'Pact of Silence' in the Madeleine McCann case?

In another Essex case which I have investigated, 19 people were having a late night, crack cocaine- and alcohol-fuelled party in Warley, near Brentwood a few years ago. One attendee was shot dead at about 3am. No-one has talked, meaning that the killer remains free and has never been charged. No-one dare give a statement to the police, to the frustration and despair of the bereaved father.

Fear by the way is not the only reason why people in this situation will not talk

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hardly the same!!
All of these people were in Barrymore's house...therefore at the crime scene....and Stuart Lubbock definately died.

There was definately "evidence" as there was a "dead body".

Barrymore's lifestyle had been dominated for years by drink and drugs so we know what kind of party and people he liked.
They started that night in a club before going on to Barrymore's house, and Stuart Lubbock didn't know any of them before he met them there. Sadly he was was probably excited that he got an invitation from a "Celebrity"

And just for the record I also believe Stuart Lubbock was murdered. And his injuries proved that IMO.

 

[Refugee]

I think that depends on their wealth and connections....Kevin Fox and David Dwolaby (sp?) were both convicted of the abductions of their daughters with little forensic evidence.

treated badly! Nowhere near as badly as they treated their poor child - the most famous self confessed failed parents in the world!

Treated badly? That would be being asked a few questions aimed at assisting the police in their enquiries then? They have escaped very lightly indeed, not even an abandonment charge! Amazing what a few connections with a few dubious characters will do!

Personally I think there should be zero tolerance for child abuse.

 

[Refugee]

Hardly the same!!
All of these people were in Barrymore's house...therefore at the crime scene....and Stuart Lubbock definately died.

There was definately "evidence" as there was a "dead body".

Barrymore's lifestyle had been dominated for years by drink and drugs so we know what kind of party and people he liked.
They started that night in a club before going on to Barrymore's house, and Stuart Lubbock didn't know any of them before he met them there. Sadly he was was probably excited that he got an invitation from a "Celebrity"

And just for the record I also believe Stuart Lubbock was murdered. And his injuries proved that IMO.

Me too, too many unanswered and unexplained questions - just like the McCanns abandonment case.

 

[Tony Bennett]

Hardly the same!!
All of these people were in Barrymore's house...therefore at the crime scene....and Stuart Lubbock definitely died. There was definitely "evidence" as there was a "dead body". Barrymore's lifestyle had been dominated for years by drink and drugs so we know what kind of party and people he liked. They started that night in a club before going on to Barrymore's house, and Stuart Lubbock didn't know any of them before he met them there. Sadly he was was probably excited that he got an invitation from a "celebrity". And just for the record I also believe Stuart Lubbock was murdered. And his injuries proved that IMO.

REPLY: No, the Lubbock/Barrymore case is not the same (agree with all your comments above re the case, by the way). I was addressing the point made by tuppence that she found it hard to understand why so many people would agree to cover up a death. Texana has answered this point another way by giving the example of the people who covered up a shooting dead by a hot tub/jacuzzi. By the way, Lubbock died shortly after entering a hot tub with two homosexuals, one of them with a long record of violence (which of course he knew nothing about). That person was Barrymore's partner/lover at the time. All three I think were high on a combination of Class 'A' drugs and drink.

From my perspective, the production by the witnesses of inaccurate and hopelessly contradictory timelines, in both the Madeleine McCann and Stuart Lubbock cases, is one of the most telling pieces of evidence that they are lying.

If you really were doing something else - in this case, disposing of a dead body and working out how to enact a cover story - then you are almost bound to come unstuck when you make up an account of what you 'really' were doing at the time

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Refugee]

Why would you assume this statement is true?
Is there any confirmation? Or is it just a repeat of a SMEAR?

So anything you don't like is a smear, and anything you do like is a fact? Like the puzzlement of the McCanns that their abandoned child had cried, a fact which was then not considered when Kate 'knew' Madeleine had been abducted and didnt bother checking with her nearby friend?

You are very selective in your views!

 

[Barnaby]

treated badly! Nowhere near as badly as they treated their poor child - the most famous self confessed failed parents in the world!

Treated badly? That would be being asked a few questions aimed at assisting the police in their enquiries then? They have escaped very lightly indeed, not even an abandonment charge! Amazing what a few connections with a few dubious characters will do!

Personally I think there should be zero tolerance for child abuse.

I hope you don't mine me bolding a piece of your post for emphasis Refugee but I so agree with that statement ZERO TOLERANCE FOR CHILD ABUSE, ANYWHERE ANYHOW, ANY PERSON, regardless of contacts in high places!
& Yes the most self confessed FAILED parents in the world, mind you don't know about the self confessing, sure in their minds they did nothing wrong, just lost a human being because of it but hell sure they have another two, what the heck!

Judging by their reactions & subsequent self absorption, I think that losing Madeleine was akin to losing £100 when you have another £100,000 stashed away at home! No big deal!

 

[april4sky]

REPLY: No, the Lubbock/Barrymore case is not the same (agree with all your comments above re the case, by the way). I was addressing the point made by tuppence that she found it hard to understand why so many people would agree to cover up a death. Texana has answered this point another way by giving the example of the people who covered up a shooting dead by a hot tub/jacuzzi. By the way, Lubbock died shortly after entering a hot tub with two homosexuals, one of them with a long record of violence (which of course he knew nothing about). That person was Barrymore's partner/lover at the time. All three I think were high on a combination of Class 'A' drugs and drink.

From my perspective, the production by the witnesses of inaccurate and hopelessly contradictory timelines, in both the Madeleine McCann and Stuart Lubbock cases, is one of the most telling pieces of evidence that they are lying.

If you really were doing something else - in this case, disposing of a dead body and working out how to enact a cover story - then you are almost bound to come unstuck when you make up an account of what you 'really' were doing at the time

Even in Texana's example we know someone was murdered while other people were present.

And it's hopelessly inaccurate IMO to say there was inaccurate and a hopelessly contradictory timeline in Madeleine's case.

The timelines given could only have been estimated times and given the circumstances and the fact they weren't using stop watches not contradictory.
It would have been very strange if their timelines matched exactly. :waitasec:

 

[SleuthMom]

Personally I think there should be zero tolerance for child abuse.

I agree 100%. As you can see there are divided views here with regards to the negligence of the McCanns. Some posters think they were wrong in leaving those children alone and should be charged, others think it was wrong as well BUT as long as it is "legal" is acceptable in their eyes.

Mind you, just because something is "legal" doesn't make it either right or acceptable. IMO.

 

[twinkiesmom]

treated badly! Nowhere near as badly as they treated their poor child - the most famous self confessed failed parents in the world!

Treated badly? That would be being asked a few questions aimed at assisting the police in their enquiries then? They have escaped very lightly indeed, not even an abandonment charge! Amazing what a few connections with a few dubious characters will do!

Personally I think there should be zero tolerance for child abuse.

Please....I was responding to the second clause of April's assertion, and you are replying to the first.

I don't agree the McCann's were treated badly, but they were named suspects.

April was saying that someone wouldn't have been declared Arguido in the US on little evidence, and I was replying that we had at least two wrongful convictions on little evidence, but the convictions were of men of working class, not privileged.

I agree with the PJ author (Amaral sp?) who said the McCann's were treated with kid gloves.

 

[twinkiesmom]

Hardly the same!!
All of these people were in Barrymore's house...therefore at the crime scene....and Stuart Lubbock definately died.

April does bring up an interesting point....The McCann's own story puts many of the Tapas directly at Madeleine's bedside, and one of them could have made her body disappear during an alleged bedcheck.

 

[Texana]

April does bring up an interesting point....The McCann's own story puts many of the Tapas directly at Madeleine's bedside, and one of them could have made her body disappear during an alleged bedcheck.

Exactly.

And by their own accounts, at various times during the evening, several of them were alone and by themselves.

 

[Tony Bennett]

april4sky wrote: "And it's hopelessly inaccurate IMO to say there was inaccurate and a hopelessly contradictory timeline in Madeleine's case"

REPLY: Oh!

In that case, april4sky, could you please enlighten us on the following:

1. When did Gerry start playing tennis that afternoon?
2. When did he stop playing because of an Achilles tendon?
3. When did he play with Wilkins that day?
4. When did he play with Julian that day?
5. Did he play with Dan after 6pm or not?
6. Did Kate go jogging from 4.30pm to 5.20pm or not?
7. Did both or either of the McCanns have high tea with Charlotte Pennington around 5.30pm/6.00pm?
8. When did Gerry McCann ask David Payne to go to the apartment?
9. Was this (a) because he was concerned about Kate or (b) to ask Kate and the children to come down and watch him playing tennis?
10. What time did David Payne go to the apartment?
11. Did Fiona Payne accompany him or not?
12. What time did David Payne leave the apartment?
13. Were the children already dressed - in white - and looking like angels, when he arrived?
14. What time did Gerry arrive back at the apartment?
15. Who read bedtime stories to the children - Kate, Gerry, or neither?
16. What time were the children bathed?
17. What time did Gerry open his bottle of Montana Sauvignon Blanc?
18. What time did Gerry and Kate arrive at the Tapas bar?
19. Were they first to arrive?
20. Did Matthew Oldfield do a check around 8.55pm, if not, what was he doing at the apartment at that time?
21. When did Gerry do his 9.00/9.05am check?
22. When was he talking to Jeremy Wilkins? - and on which side of the road?
23. When did Jane Tanner see the abductor?
24. Did Matthew Oldfield do a second check or not? If so, when?
25. Between what times was Russell O'Brien away from the Tapas bar?
26. What time did he return to the Tapas bar?
27. Did Jane Tanner return to the Tapas bar after seeing the abductor?
28. Was she on her way from the Tapas bar or going back to the Tapas bar when she saw the abductor?
29. Did Kate really sit and wait at 10.00pm, as she says, for 10 minutes in the apartment before sounding the alarm?
30. If the shutters could not be opened from the outside, who opened them and when?
31. Which door to the apartment did they leave unlocked, and why?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Refugee]

Even in Texana's example we know someone was murdered while other people were present.

And it's hopelessly inaccurate IMO to say there was inaccurate and a hopelessly contradictory timeline in Madeleine's case.

The timelines given could only have been estimated times and given the circumstances and the fact they weren't using stop watches not contradictory.
It would have been very strange if their timelines matched exactly. :waitasec:

You seem to be deliberately missing the point - read Gerry's blogs, he changes times and deliberately puts Yanners timing in contradiction to his own (9:10 looks down on Madeleine, 9:10 Tanner see's abductor, yet she NEVER SAID 9:10!).

So the inconsistant timings are thought out inconsistancies, errors introduced in the cold light of day many months after the vent. Now why would they do that?

Come on, stop lying to yourself!

 

[Refugee]

april4sky wrote: "And it's hopelessly inaccurate IMO to say there was inaccurate and a hopelessly contradictory timeline in Madeleine's case"

REPLY: Oh!

In that case, april4sky, could you please enlighten us on the following:

1. When did Gerry start playing tennis that afternoon?
2. When did he stop playing because of an Achilles tendon?
3. When did he play with Wilkins that day?
4. When did he play with Julian that day?
5. Did he play with Dan after 6pm or not?
6. Did Kate go jogging from 4.30pm to 5.20pm or not?
7. Did both or either of the McCanns have high tea with Charlotte Pennington around 5.30pm/6.00pm?
8. When did Gerry McCann ask David Payne to go to the apartment?
9. Was this (a) because he was concerned about Kate or (b) to ask Kate and the children to come down and watch him playing tennis?
10. What time did David Payne go to the apartment?
11. Did Fiona Payne accompany him or not?
12. What time did David Payne leave the apartment?
13. Were the children already dressed - in white - and looking like angels, when he arrived?
14. What time did Gerry arrive back at the apartment?
15. Who read bedtime stories to the children - Kate, Gerry, or neither?
16. What time were the children bathed?
17. What time did Gerry open his bottle of Montana Sauvignon Blanc?
18. What time did Gerry and Kate arrive at the Tapas bar?
19. Were they first to arrive?
20. Did Matthew Oldfield do a check around 8.55pm, if not, what was he doing at the apartment at that time?
21. When did Gerry do his 9.00/9.05am check?
22. When was he talking to Jeremy Wilkins? - and on which side of the road?
23. When did Jane Tanner see the abductor?
24. Did Matthew Oldfield do a second check or not? If so, when?
25. Between what times was Russell O'Brien away from the Tapas bar?
26. What time did he return to the Tapas bar?
27. Did Jane Tanner return to the Tapas bar after seeing the abductor?
28. Was she on her way from the Tapas bar or going back to the Tapas bar when she saw the abductor?
29. Did Kate really sit and wait at 10.00pm, as she says, for 10 minutes in the apartment before sounding the alarm?
30. If the shutters could not be opened from the outside, who opened them and when?
31. Which door to the apartment did they leave unlocked, and why?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Excellent illustration - these people do not answer the basic questions - they DONT WANT THEM ADDRESSED - they didnt want to clear up the detail of the third of May - depite the fact that this would clear the decks to enable a focus on the possible abduction scenario - they know full well what happened to Madeleine and its DISTRACTION from the events of third of May thay want.