Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 26

[Clutchbag]

:jail:

rumours about swinging , sexual innuendo between the group, planned murder . to name but just a couple but you know what I mean they have been dragged through every rumour mill going - yet never charged of any crime - no evidence of any crime .

how do you know that these calls were the first made ? Witnesses say that requeste were made to call the police soon after 10.

but in the long run it doesnt really matter now - all history I suppose

Because that is what police have stated officially in their final report and there is no record of any call before 10 41 from the mark warner phone log

Oh those rumours, well I have normally ignored them, cant help people on the internet having ideas

i try to stick to what is documented and televised

Yes its history in a way but remember the case is not closed

 

[JodyMT]

I haven't read every post, so forgive me if this question has already been answered.

All these years later, are the McCann's back to work as physicians? I know in 2007 the father was supposed to go back.

 

[gord]

:jail:

Because that is what police have stated officially in their final report and there is no record of any call before 10 41 from the mark warner phone log

Oh those rumours, well I have normally ignored them, cant help people on the internet having ideas

i try to stick to what is documented and televised

Yes its history in a way but remember the case is not closed

Ok even if that was the first call made to GNR - I havent seen anywhere in the statements where they claimed to have personaly called the police before then - we are talking half an hour here - from what I saw they asked someone in the group to go and inform Warner to call the police after doing a search - which would say take things to quarter past --

What do you base your assertion that they deliberatley lied about calling the police ??

 

[Clutchbag]

I haven't read every post, so forgive me if this question has already been answered.

All these years later, are the McCann's back to work as physicians? I know in 2007 the father was supposed to go back.

The father is a heart specialist/hospital consultant and went back to work

The mother never went back to work as a GP or any other employed work saying her new job was campaigning fundraising and working on the search

 

[Clutchbag]

Ok even if that was the first call made to GNR - I havent seen anywhere in the statements where they claimed to have personaly called the police before then - we are talking half an hour here - from what I saw they asked someone in the group to go and inform Warner to call the police after doing a search - which would say take things to quarter past --

What do you base your assertion that they deliberatley lied about calling the police ??

perhaps I was wrong to say they deliberately lied, but its a known fact they have said on tv and IIRC in KMs book, that the police were called within five ten minutes, this is long after they had read the police files and is part of the wider picture of their efforts to make the portuguese police seem totally incompetent by exagerating facts. Complaining they did not preserve the crime scene when it was them and their friends and others who did not preserve it but tampered with it, as I posted earlier, saying the PJ criminal police did not turn up for five hours when they turned up just before 1am, I make that less than three hours after being called by the GNR local police. What was the point of such exageration and embroidering of facts. This happened from 3rd May evening, telling their relatives abroad police were doing nothing andgenerally slagging them off.

of course locals and others painted a different picture completely. You really do have to read KMs book to see how ungrateful scathing and libellous she is about all the people who tried to help. Its quite shocking. She blamed all and sundry for what they did or didnt do whilst taking absolutely no responsibility for their actions.

 

[osadelnorte]

She blamed all and sundry for what they did or didnt do whilst taking absolutely no responsibility for their actions.

I don't think that's exactly true. I just finished her book about two weeks ago and I really did think she was sorry for making the choice to leave the children alone, as if she realized how unsafe it really was. Maybe at first she didn't take any responsibility for that aspect but I think that by the time she wrote the book, several years on, she had come to some sense of self-recrimination for that. JMO.

 

[Clutchbag]

I don't think that's exactly true. I just finished her book about two weeks ago and I really did think she was sorry for making the choice to leave the children alone, as if she realized how unsafe it really was. Maybe at first she didn't take any responsibility for that aspect but I think that by the time she wrote the book, several years on, she had come to some sense of self-recrimination for that. JMO.

they have always claimed what they did was responsible and not irresponsible and they claimed that by three weeks later THOUSANDS of people had written to them and said they either dis the same thing or would do the same thing, this is gerry on camera speaking which i dont believe

and I do not agree anyway that they thought it was safe to leave three babies on their own in an unlocked apartment for at least half hour stretches, anything could have happened, the amount of finger pointing was atrocious, even at innocent employees who looked after her kids during the day and waitress at tapas bar


i also did not like her embroidering actual facts, and telling blatant lies in the book on a variety of subjects, well the vastmajority of the population have only read what is in the papers so they wont know the difference so shes safeish on that score i suppose, maybe, i would hazard a guess the vast majority of people are raising an eyebrow

ETA i dont understand what you mean by when she realised how unsafe it really was. Since theres no evidence of abduction it cant be said it was unsafe from that point of view. Just unsafe in general terms leaving babies to cope alone.

 

[Sheromom]

Personally, INSTINCT alone would never have allowed me to leave my babies alone under ANY circumstances!

 

[SapphireSteel]

I don't think that's exactly true. I just finished her book about two weeks ago and I really did think she was sorry for making the choice to leave the children alone, as if she realized how unsafe it really was. Maybe at first she didn't take any responsibility for that aspect but I think that by the time she wrote the book, several years on, she had come to some sense of self-recrimination for that. JMO.

I'm glad you read her "account of the truth".

Yes, that's what she called it.

Back when I went to school, there was either the truth, or lies. An account of the truth does not actually say "here is the truth" does it?

An account of something means, from that persons viewpoint.

So here we have Kate publishing her "account of the truth" when she could have just published "the truth".

But then of course she'd be in jail.

 

[osadelnorte]

ETA i dont understand what you mean by when she realised how unsafe it really was. Since theres no evidence of abduction it cant be said it was unsafe from that point of view. Just unsafe in general terms leaving babies to cope alone.

That's what I meant. My reading of her book gives me the impression she realizes now that leaving the children alone in the apartment was just generally unsafe, aside from any theoretical risk of abduction. It's just my opinion and my feelings after reading her book.

 

[osadelnorte]

I'm glad you read her "account of the truth".

Yes, that's what she called it.

Back when I went to school, there was either the truth, or lies. An account of the truth does not actually say "here is the truth" does it?

An account of something means, from that persons viewpoint.

So here we have Kate publishing her "account of the truth" when she could have just published "the truth".

But then of course she'd be in jail.

But since I don't know the truth, and as far as I know, nobody else here does either, I'm willing to hear her out. I don't know what happened, I wasn't there. But I've read many different conjectures and theories and I also wanted to read her side of the story. Do I believe it unequivocally? Of course not. But I don't necessarily believe anything I've read anywhere when it comes to this story. Nothing has convinced me of either their guilt or their innocence.

 

[Clutchbag]

That's what I meant. My reading of her book gives me the impression she realizes now that leaving the children alone in the apartment was just generally unsafe, aside from any theoretical risk of abduction.

Thats OK youre entitled to your opinion

fact remains she told a whole load of lies in it, unfortunately for her it is now a document attached to the police case and can be used as evidence

eg a white but blatant lie

KM
they were not worried about their kids falling off a balcony as they had a ground floor flat unlike some of their friends who had higher flats with balconies so they felt safe

The Actual facts
The flat was on a hill and it DID have a balcony with a sharp drop and more than a dozen concrete steps to get up to the door

So you tell me she thought it safe to leave three babies toddlers with the back door open that led to that balcony from which any of them could have fallen over

Give up

I guess their lying about and trashing cadaver dogs doesnt pique your curiosity either, oops wrong thread

 

[SapphireSteel]

That's what I meant. My reading of her book gives me the impression she realizes now that leaving the children alone in the apartment was just generally unsafe, aside from any theoretical risk of abduction. It's just my opinion and my feelings after reading her book.

Ok so for years they denied any responsibility, any thought that what they did was unsafe, but one book has negated all that for you?

The McCann will be pleased, the aim of the book was to garner sympathy and more MONEY and it's worked.

Please don't think I'm bashing you personally...people like these rely on good people giving them the "benefit of the doubt".

If they were poor Mexicans they'd be on death row and no one would have ANY issues calling them as guilty as sin.

They have traded heavily on their position in society, and the generosity of people like yourselves who cannot imagine two parents doing such a thing.

That is why they have raked in (and spent) millions of Euros on their dead daughters back.

Personally I would rather have seen Kate answer the questions put to her by the Investigating Officers, than write an "account of the truth" to sell.

:banghead:

 

[Clutchbag]

Personally, INSTINCT alone would never have allowed me to leave my babies alone under ANY circumstances!

Thays what i always thought strange, how can any mother sit and eat a meal and have drinks 250 metres away from her babies, out of sight and out of earshot in a foreign place AND leaving the bloody door open!!! At one ppint it was reportes they did this for fear of fire, unbelievable


I know fathers are less paranoid, but hey, they were left alone not teenagers with mobile phones or anything


Too Young To Be Alone: McCanns Culpable - YouTube

Still KM is now an AMBASSADOR for missing kids, what a great selection she was, negligent mum becomes saviour of missing kids

 

[Clutchbag]

Ok so for years they denied any responsibility, any thought that what they did was unsafe, but one book has negated all that for you?

The McCann will be pleased, the aim of the book was to garner sympathy and more MONEY and it's worked.

Please don't think I'm bashing you personally...people like these rely on good people giving them the "benefit of the doubt".

If they were poor Mexicans they'd be on death row and no one would have ANY issues calling them as guilty as sin.

They have traded heavily on their position in society, and the generosity of people like yourselves who cannot imagine two parents doing such a thing.

That is why they have raked in (and spent) millions of Euros on their dead daughters back.

Personally I would rather have seen Kate answer the questions put to her by the Investigating Officers, than write an "account of the truth" to sell.

:banghead:

oh what an excellent post

Still she reckons her book might spark memories LOL five yeats later, would havebeen good to do a reconstruction whenasked by police to spark memories but they werenot keen onthe idea, questioned if it would help, said people need to realise what theyve been through,reconstruction would be traumatising for them, their friends said they didnt want to do it either, hello,red flags, thought it was all about no stoneunturned for their daughter and not about THEM,never mind

Btw this is ALL on video

 

[Clutchbag]

grieving distraught father a few days after maddie went missing
shot by paparazzi and five days after he was telling people at home his kid was taken by paedos

Shocking


Gerry McCann is happy - YouTube

 

[osadelnorte]

Thats OK youre entitled to your opinion

fact remains she told a whole load of lies in it, unfortunately for her it is now a document attached to the police case and can be used as evidence

eg a white but blatant lie

KM
they were not worried about their kids falling off a balcony as they had a ground floor flat unlike some of their friends who had higher flats with balconies so they felt safe

The Actual facts
The flat was on a hill and it DID have a balcony with a sharp drop and more than a dozen concrete steps to get up to the door

So you tell me she thought it safe to leave three babies toddlers with the back door open that led to that balcony from which any of them could have fallen over

Give up

I guess their lying about and trashing cadaver dogs doesnt pique your curiosity either, oops wrong thread

I'm not sure why you're being so hostile toward me. I thought we were allowed to share our opinions here. I have no idea what happened to Madeleine, I'm just attempting to keep an open mind about the whole situation. I thought that was an acceptable position on this website, but maybe I've been mistaken.

 

[osadelnorte]

Ok so for years they denied any responsibility, any thought that what they did was unsafe, but one book has negated all that for you?

The McCann will be pleased, the aim of the book was to garner sympathy and more MONEY and it's worked.

Please don't think I'm bashing you personally...people like these rely on good people giving them the "benefit of the doubt".

If they were poor Mexicans they'd be on death row and no one would have ANY issues calling them as guilty as sin.

They have traded heavily on their position in society, and the generosity of people like yourselves who cannot imagine two parents doing such a thing.

That is why they have raked in (and spent) millions of Euros on their dead daughters back.

Personally I would rather have seen Kate answer the questions put to her by the Investigating Officers, than write an "account of the truth" to sell.

:banghead:

I didn't pay a dime for her book. I borrowed it from my local public library.

I can imagine parents "doing such a thing." I can imagine it because it happens far too often in our society. But this case, much like the Ramsey case, does not seem clear-cut to me. If it does to you, that's fine with me and I respect your position.

 

[Clutchbag]

I'm not sure why you're being so hostile toward me. I thought we were allowed to share our opinions here. I have no idea what happened to Madeleine, I'm just attempting to keep an open mind about the whole situation. I thought that was an acceptable position on this website, but maybe I've been mistaken.

I wasnt aware I was being hostile towards you on the contrary I respect your views but your views may not bebased onall the facts thats all apologies

i see you posted no view on the facts and comments I posted though hmmm I think your mind is made up mostly as on the innocent fence which is your right but its not your right to IGNORE facts that point to lying or culpability

oh actually it is, no one can tell others how and what to think, but ignoring evidence ??

 

[osadelnorte]

I wasnt aware I was being hostile towards you on the contrary I respect your views but your views may not bebased onall the facts thats all apologies

i see you posted no view on tue facts and comments I posted though hmmm I think your mind is made up

Perhaps you are privy to facts that I am not. I'm reading the websites linked to here as well as Kate's book. I'm simply attempting to understand the case with the information available to me. I just don't completely agree with your position based on what I currently know.

i see you posted no view on the facts and comments I posted though hmmm I think your mind is made up mostly as on the innocent fence which is your right but its not your right to IGNORE facts that point to lying or culpability

I was not aware that I was required to respond to everything you say here. I am not ignoring anything. I'm reading and digesting and thinking.