PDA

View Full Version : Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 20


Pages : [1] 2

colomom
01-16-2008, 12:03 PM
Thread No. 20

Texana
01-16-2008, 08:55 PM
What, no takers to start this going?

Here we go.

Predictions for the New Year and Madeleine:

I predict that the McCanns will withdraw from public life more and more and the role of advocate for missing children will gradually decrease. Gerry will become involved in his career again.

It will be more difficult for Kate to find her place in the world, even with twins still at home.

ThoughtFox
01-17-2008, 01:43 AM
Texana: I'm not sure if the McCanns will withdraw from public life. I guess it depends on how much pressure the cops put on them.

The only thing I can think of to write is that I wish we would get some sort of "official" report about this little girl missing in Spain instead of articles about Metodo "believing" it is connected to Maddie. Metodo and Team McCann can say anything they want in a vacuum without any official input.

Trino
01-17-2008, 08:53 AM
What, no takers to start this going?

Here we go.

Predictions for the New Year and Madeleine:

I predict that the McCanns will withdraw from public life more and more and the role of advocate for missing children will gradually decrease. Gerry will become involved in his career again.

It will be more difficult for Kate to find her place in the world, even with twins still at home.

I think the McCanns will continue to stay in the limelight as long as the money is there and the media publishes stories about them and/or Madeline.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-17-2008, 10:54 AM
Have you seen this yet? I bet Jerry is PO'd and Kate is loving it!


Kate McCann included on sex symbol list

Tuesday, January 15, 2008
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=84005&in_page_id=34

Kate McCann has been included in a Lads' Mag's list of most sexy female pin ups.

Barnaby
01-17-2008, 09:57 PM
Interestedwoman, where did you find that the McCanns have had 320,000 pounds for living expenses? That's an enormous amount of money!!!!

Pinkhammer
01-17-2008, 10:42 PM
I think the McCanns will withdraw from life....straight into a Portuguese jail cell!

(I can dream, can't I?)

Texana
01-17-2008, 11:27 PM
I should amend my prediction to say that the McCanns will withdraw as a way of avoiding serious questions about the night Madeleine went missing and their actions then and afterwards.

I see their repeated wish to "be normal again" as their way of avoiding the consequences of that night--so that any questions or repeated disbelief gets filed under "not wanting them to move on and have a decent life after all."

I can also see Kate trying to get pregnant again...

Claycat
01-17-2008, 11:48 PM
I still believe they are innocent, negligent, but innocent!

Gatinho
01-18-2008, 06:04 PM
Maybe it wouldn't be a bad result if they 'withdrew', I sense a general weariness with the case and some despair in ever getting the truth. If the PJ turn out not to have a case I would find any subsequent media events, films, books and so on from the McCanns too hard to take.

daffodil
01-18-2008, 06:18 PM
I think the McCanns will withdraw from life....straight into a Portuguese jail cell!

(I can dream, can't I?)

Even if they are innocent? :eek: :waitasec:

Pinkhammer
01-18-2008, 07:24 PM
Yes, for severe child neglect!

Of course it will never happen.

So tell your buddies to have no fear.

daffodil
01-18-2008, 07:37 PM
Yes, for severe child neglect!

Of course it will never happen.

So tell your buddies to have no fear.

EH?? Buddies? :eek: What in the world are you talking about? :confused: I dont know the McCanns from a hole in the wall,just dont like some of the remarks made,doesnt mean I have to KNOW them does it? :doh:

april4sky
01-19-2008, 12:12 AM
By Lorraine Kelly.

McCanns guilty.. only of caring

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/columnists/lorraine_kelly/article703962.ece

I BELIEVE Kate and Gerry McCann are GUILTY...

... Guilty of leaving their kids alone while they enjoyed a meal with friends, and they are most certainly guilty of moving heaven and earth in order to try to find their beloved Madeleine.
But that is all.

I have said it before — but I will say it again. Those who attack the McCanns should try to think the unthinkable and imagine what it would be like to be in their shoes.
Then ask yourself what you would do if your child was missing and there was a chance, no matter how slim, to get them back. You would stop at nothing.

Bandini
01-19-2008, 07:23 AM
I have said it before — but I will say it again. Those who attack the McCanns should try to think the unthinkable and imagine what it would be like to be in their shoes.
Then ask yourself what you would do if your child was missing and there was a chance, no matter how slim, to get them back. You would stop at nothing.

OK, first of all, I would NOT have left my children alone in the room - even if they were sound asleep - so I can go dining/drinking with friends while staying in a virtually unfamiliar place. I worry too much about the "what ifs" (fire, break-in, you name it). But I'll look past that part for now and imagine myself in their shoes upon finding my daughter missing. After thoroughly searching the room for her, I would absolutely panic and contact the police. I would NOT leave my other YOUNGER children alone if there was reason to suspect my daughter had been abducted. I would cooperate with investigators and answer ALL QUESTIONS (yep, all 40 of 'em) no matter how incriminating they may seem. I would stop at nothing to find her - and would conduct myself and my efforts with INTEGRITY and respect. I would find it impossible to go jogging, shopping, sight-seeing or partying until my daughter is found. I WOULD NOT BEHAVE LIKE THE MCCANNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ShannonOhara
01-19-2008, 07:33 AM
Have you seen this yet? I bet Jerry is PO'd and Kate is loving it!


Kate McCann included on sex symbol list

Tuesday, January 15, 2008
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=84005&in_page_id=34

Kate McCann has been included in a Lads' Mag's list of most sexy female pin ups.


THIS JUST BIZARRE!!!!!!

Prickle
01-19-2008, 08:26 AM
Gerry for Scot of the year, Kate a pin-up in a lads mag :eek: , famous meeting with the Pope and First Lady and many more Politicians. All this from losing their daughter.

The world has gone MAD!


Bandini...TOTALLY agree with everything you say.

april4sky
01-19-2008, 09:10 AM
I have said it before — but I will say it again. Those who attack the McCanns should try to think the unthinkable and imagine what it would be like to be in their shoes.
Then ask yourself what you would do if your child was missing and there was a chance, no matter how slim, to get them back. You would stop at nothing.

OK, first of all, I would NOT have left my children alone in the room - even if they were sound asleep - so I can go dining/drinking with friends while staying in a virtually unfamiliar place. I worry too much about the "what ifs" (fire, break-in, you name it). But I'll look past that part for now and imagine myself in their shoes upon finding my daughter missing. After thoroughly searching the room for her, I would absolutely panic and contact the police. I would NOT leave my other YOUNGER children alone if there was reason to suspect my daughter had been abducted. I would cooperate with investigators and answer ALL QUESTIONS (yep, all 40 of 'em) no matter how incriminating they may seem. I would stop at nothing to find her - and would conduct myself and my efforts with INTEGRITY and respect. I would find it impossible to go jogging, shopping, sight-seeing or partying until my daughter is found. I WOULD NOT BEHAVE LIKE THE MCCANNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Bandini no one is argueing about your first point. I believe we have all said time and again they shoudn't have left the children alone. It was also said in the article.

As for the rest..If I were them I wouldn't trust the PLE either after they deliberately leaked lies to the press smearing them. A couple of detectives, one the leading detective on Madeleine's case is on criminal charges himself for his part in the beating up of another missing childs mother.

Who is to say what anyone in their situation would need to do to get through each day. Jogging is a big part of their lives so if it made them feel normal and gave them strengh..If only for a short time. Who are we to critisize.
They are doing everything they can to find Madeleine. Against all odds and cruel misinformation. Which is more than can be said for the PLE.
As for the rest. Everybody has to shop and I don't believe they have shopped for the sheer pleasure of it. Accusing them of sight-seeing and partying though.......cruel as well as over the top. IMO.

april4sky
01-19-2008, 09:46 AM
Have you seen this yet? I bet Jerry is PO'd and Kate is loving it!


Kate McCann included on sex symbol list

Tuesday, January 15, 2008
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=84005&in_page_id=34

Kate McCann has been included in a Lads' Mag's list of most sexy female pin ups.This is totally sick. Sadly par for the course from a crappy publication.

daffodil
01-19-2008, 10:32 AM
What partying and sightseeing did they do?

colomom
01-19-2008, 10:57 AM
THIS JUST BIZARRE!!!!!!

Not so bizarre if you consider:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/Kate1.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/Kate2.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/Kate3.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/Kate4.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/Kate5.jpg
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/Kate6.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/Kate7.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/Kate8.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/Kate9.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/Kate10.jpg
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/kate-mccann-day-1-of-questioning.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/katemccann/mcctreeDM0908_228x446.jpg

And that took me about 10 minutes to collect all of those.

Strangest mother (of a missing baby girl who may be in the hands of a gang of pedophiles) that I have ever seen.
:eek:

Bandini
01-19-2008, 11:13 AM
What partying and sightseeing did they do?

Please go back and read my post again. I said "I would not do....". I did not say the McCanns went sightseeing and such. The question was "put yourself in their shoes", which I did - and then I described how I would conduct myself in the same situation. You're reading things into my post that aren't there and then launching an attack because I don't sit on the same side of the fence that you do. :mad: My post may have indirectly implied that the McCanns went sightseeing - and I don't doubt that they did. They went jogging, photos were taken of them out and about with the twins, etc. That's what THEY did. Again, the question was 'WHAT WOULD YOU DO".

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-19-2008, 11:20 AM
LOL Colomom :)

"Don't hate me cuz I'm beautiful"

Seriously, though, What I find strange is Jane Tanner in all of this. Usually beautiful people only hang with other beautiful people...unless the ugly ducking is their user friendly, scape goat, will lie out their teeth for you side kick...who worships the ground you walk on and puts you on a pedestal so high you can almost see eternity, the wind beneath your wings kind of a friend...LOL

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-19-2008, 11:57 AM
...As for the rest..If I were them I wouldn't trust the PLE either after they deliberately leaked lies to the press smearing them. A couple of detectives, one the leading detective on Madeleine's case is on criminal charges himself for his part in the beating up of another missing childs mother...
.
***Warning...Graphic***
Are you talking about Leonor Cipiano? The mother who was having an incestuous relationship with her brother Joao? Who both sexually abused little Joana, with witnesses to prove she was assaulted, and large amounts of her blood found in their refrigerator? The one who confessed to the murder to her father, and the brother confessed to his attorney? The one who chopped up her daughter and put body parts into junk yard scrap cars that where then crushed and shipped to Spain for recycling?

Have you read the Cipriano trial files? They are available for anyone who is interested in reading what facts were, proved before the judge and jury. The Ciprianos were not convicted because the PJ forced a confession out of them. Confessions...even signed confessions, can be retracted at any point during a trial, and actually rendered invalid and useless. The Ciprianos were convicted because the confession that Mr Cipriano made and signed in front of his own lawyer, detailed the murder and dismemberment of his niece's body. The police then worked from these details backwards, searching for forensic evidence, (led by Joao himself) to corroborate the confession. Once they knew where to look and what to look for, according to Mr Cipriano's "instructions", they found the evidence that ultimately convicted the "couple". It was more than enough for a conviction, even without a body.

Any scum bag POS woman who is capable of doing what she did to her own daughter, is also capable of lying about police brutality...

daffodil
01-19-2008, 12:14 PM
Please go back and read my post again. I said "I would not do....". I did not say the McCanns went sightseeing and such. The question was "put yourself in their shoes", which I did - and then I described how I would conduct myself in the same situation. You're reading things into my post that aren't there and then launching an attack because I don't sit on the same side of the fence that you do. :mad: My post may have indirectly implied that the McCanns went sightseeing - and I don't doubt that they did. They went jogging, photos were taken of them out and about with the twins, etc. That's what THEY did. Again, the question was 'WHAT WOULD YOU DO".

Yes your post DID imply the McCanns had done those things and was misleading.I dont see WHERE I have "launched an attack" so perhaps you could point it out to me please.I merely asked what partying and sightseeing they did perhaps YOU are reading things into MY post that aren't there? :waitasec:

Barnaby
01-19-2008, 12:35 PM
I agree with everything that Bandini, Colomom & Interestedwoman have said above!
God forbid if my child was missing I would not be thinking of going shopping for jewellery to meet the Pope. I am interested in fashion & like to keep myself well groomed but by gum if I had been in Kate McCanns situation, I wouldn't have given a damn if my hair was standing on end never mind going to have my highlights done, & coordinating jewellery would have been the least of my notions! Kate McCann was always seen with jewellery from the beginning so she obviously had some on holiday with her as most of us bring. What the heck did she need to go shopping for? I can possibly understand her going to buy a respectable suit for the meeting rather than wear holiday clothes but I'm sure the Pope was not one bit interested in whether her earrings were new or not!

& furthermore has anyone ever seen this woman's eyes swollen from crying? Anytime I cry my eyes look awful the next day! they were told not to cry in public fair enough but surely at some time we would have seen signs of crying in private despite make up?

The jogging is just unbelievable, one thing that worry & trauma does is sap all your energy! I have recently been worried about someone who is ill & believe me I have been lying around achieving little, no energy & this is not even a family member!

& for the record I don't think I would ever smile again never mind the huge grins that we saw soon after from the McCanns!!! I am afraid that despite trying to live a normal life for my other children they would have the misfortune to grow up with a deeply depressed mother not one who would frolick, laugh & play days after losing their sibling!!

daffodil
01-19-2008, 12:56 PM
I agree with everything that Bandini, Colomom & Interestedwoman have said above!
God forbid if my child was missing I would not be thinking of going shopping for jewellery to meet the Pope. I am interested in fashion & like to keep myself well groomed but by gum if I had been in Kate McCanns situation, I wouldn't have given a damn if my hair was standing on end never mind going to have my highlights done, & coordinating jewellery would have been the least of my notions! Kate McCann was always seen with jewellery from the beginning so she obviously had some on holiday with her as most of us bring. What the heck did she need to go shopping for? I can possibly understand her going to buy a respectable suit for the meeting rather than wear holiday clothes but I'm sure the Pope was not one bit interested in whether her earrings were new or not!

& furthermore has anyone ever seen this woman's eyes swollen from crying? Anytime I cry my eyes look awful the next day! they were told not to cry in public fair enough but surely at some time we would have seen signs of crying in private despite make up?

The jogging is just unbelievable, one thing that worry & trauma does is sap all your energy! I have recently been worried about someone who is ill & believe me I have been lying around achieving little, no energy & this is not even a family member!

& for the record I don't think I would ever smile again never mind the huge grins that we saw soon after from the McCanns!!! I am afraid that despite trying to live a normal life for my other children they would have the misfortune to grow up with a deeply depressed mother not one who would frolick, laugh & play days after losing their sibling!!


Do you have a RELIABLE source that says she bought new jewellry and had her hair highlighted? I havent seen that as a FACT anywhere :confused:

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-19-2008, 01:04 PM
...I
& furthermore has anyone ever seen this woman's eyes swollen from crying? Anytime I cry my eyes look awful the next day! they were told not to cry in public fair enough but surely at some time we would have seen signs of crying in private despite make up?...



All excellent points Barnaby, but the above quote is something I never thought of, and OH SO TRUE. When ever I have a good cry over anything, (a lost pet, a sick child, sad movie, and argument with DH...or worse, a death in the family) My eyes are so puffy the next morning, they hardly open. It just doesn't go away quickly, it takes several hours and a pot of coffee...and forget make-up, it all drips off, as the swelling goes down. Kate always looks as fresh as the new fallen snow. All except one picture I've seen of her, she looks well put together....and NO PUFFY EYES.

colomom
01-19-2008, 01:23 PM
Actually people, the McCann's did party (sort of). There is a difference between say a dinner party and a New Year's Eve party but the McCanns did alot of socializing with friends and, strangely enough, they often went to see their friends at their houses rather than having them come to the villa. So it appears that they spent alot of time going visiting rather than having people come visit them (other than family). They also managed to squeeze in some sightseeing.

There are a few entries in his blog (http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk) of these types of affairs. For instance:

"We then drove to the concert in Lagos in aid of Madeleine, which is the first large public event in Portugal that I know of supporting the campaign. It was interesting mix of jazz, blues, orchestra and rap!" (Day 35)

"A former world pipe band champion, Alasdair Gillies who is a friend of one of my sisters, has composed a Marvellous March for Madeleine that will be played by 100 pipers from all over the world. It should be quite a spectacle and hopefully it will be a celebration, and not a another marker that Madeleine is still missing." (Day 85)

"We were invited round to some firends for dinner which was great" (Day 53)

"We have met some incredibly lovely people in the last few months. Today we caught up with a fantastic couple that met in London and lived there for 35 years before retiring to the Algarve. They have been incredibly kind to us and the twins very much enjoyed the apple cake we had with them." (Day 107)

And "sightseeing":

"We left the Embassy just after 9.00am and stopped en route to the Vatican, at Piazza Pia for a photo opportunity with St Peters in the distance." (Day 27)

"This afternoon we had a meeting with the British Ambassador at his residence to update him on our meetings. The Embassy itself is a stunning building almost rivalling the Whitehouse" (Day 83)

"We finished with a very quick tour of the public areas in the White House" (Day82)

"visited the Algarve ZooMarine which they really enjoyed, particularly the dolphins." (Day79)

I have also read reports that KM spent alot of time in local bars following Maddie's disappearance. Those reports are unsubstantiated and rumor but, nevertheless they are out there.

We can quibble over the meaning of these terms, partying and sightseeing, but the point is that many people find the McCann's behavior to be very different than what they think they might experience if they were in their shoes.

Morag
01-19-2008, 01:34 PM
LOL Colomom :)

"Don't hate me cuz I'm beautiful"

Seriously, though, What I find strange is Jane Tanner in all of this. Usually beautiful people only hang with other beautiful people...unless the ugly ducking is their user friendly, scape goat, will lie out their teeth for you side kick...who worships the ground you walk on and puts you on a pedestal so high you can almost see eternity, the wind beneath your wings kind of a friend...LOL
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.spcm.org/Journal/local/cache-vignettes/L199xH200/breveon3271-d0715.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.spcm.org/Journal/spip.php%3Fbreve3271&h=200&w=199&sz=10&hl=en&start=10&sig2=DCQfXxc1gwxPFL73r15xZQ&tbnid=ZrOkqPfZmSSt9M:&tbnh=104&tbnw=103&ei=_kCSR_OSHaD6ecb8zAo&prev=/images%3Fq%3D%2522jane%2Btanner%2527%26gbv%3D2%26s vnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG%26ie%3DUTF-8

Here's the most recent picture of Jane Tanner. I think she's lovely (fabulous cheekbones), certainly more attractive than some of the other Tapas women (and their husbands). The original photos of her when she scowled at the photographers made us think that she was less than attractive. At any rate, her character is what counts, and we don't yet know about that...

colomom
01-19-2008, 01:36 PM
Do you have a RELIABLE source that says she bought new jewellry and had her hair highlighted? I havent seen that as a FACT anywhere :confused:

Daffodil,

If you researched the photographs of Kate over the 4 months they were in PDL it is OBVIOUS that she had her hair highlighted. The streaks and the color in her hair change and she never had roots showing. That one is a given.

As far as jewelry, you are missing the point. The point is (IMO) who wears jewelry when your child is missing? In order to take the time to be carefully groomed and decorated one would have to sit in front of a mirror and "primp". This indicates a level of egotistical behavior that most mother's of missing children would be incapable of. Since is is also obvious that she purchased new clothes in PDL and she almost always had jewelry on in her pictures, chances are pretty good that she purchased accessories with her outfits. It seems that it would be important to her.

Tell us about all the things that Kate did that is indicative of a grieving mother.....please.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-19-2008, 02:04 PM
Actually people, the McCann's did party (sort of)....

There are a few entries in his blog (http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk) of these types of affairs. For instance:

And "sightseeing":

"We left the Embassy just after 9.00am and stopped en route to the Vatican, at Piazza Pia for a photo opportunity with St Peters in the distance." (Day 27)

"This afternoon we had a meeting with the British Ambassador at his residence to update him on our meetings. The Embassy itself is a stunning building almost rivalling the Whitehouse" (Day 83)

"We finished with a very quick tour of the public areas in the White House" (Day82)

"visited the Algarve ZooMarine which they really enjoyed, particularly the dolphins." (Day79).


Few more to add:

Kate and I started off with an early morning run to the the top of the nearby cliffs. Sean and Amelie were back in kids club and went swimming again (day 24)

Later in the afternoon we went down to the beach and had dinner in one of the restaurants which Sean and Amelie really enjoyed. Sean, in particular has acquired a taste for sea-bass! (day 36)

After this we headed down to Sagres which is the very most southwestern tip of Portugal. There is a very nice beach and we had lunch with the family. (day 37)


Family day spent with Sean, Amelie, our friends and their kids (day 58)

Family day again... Our friends are heading home in the morning and I picked up some family from the airport tonight. (day 59)

Quiet family day (day 65)

Kate and I both managed early morning runs today- it is definitely the time of day to it with the high temperatures in the middle of summer. Getting some aerobic exercise certainly helps us feel better physically and psychologically which helps maintain our positive attitude. (day 67)

I can bet you that a quit family day is not searching for their missing daughter, it's shopping and sightseeing WITH FRIENDS.

Bandini
01-19-2008, 02:11 PM
[quote=Barnaby;1923792]

The jogging is just unbelievable, one thing that worry & trauma does is sap all your energy! I have recently been worried about someone who is ill & believe me I have been lying around achieving little, no energy & this is not even a family member!


Egg-zackly!!!!! I am a runner/jogger, and I have experienced it, and heard it from others as yourself that worry and trauma affects one physically as well as mentally. When I read that K & G jogged UP THE HILLS within a week or two of Maddie missing, I could not understand how or where they got their energy. Even if they did it out of ANGER, the emotion would sap whatever energy they have. Running, IMO, is 55% mental endurance. Anyway, keeping it on track here - I can't believe that K & G would have it so much "together" mentally that they would be able to hold back sincere tears and anger and fear because they were told not to display emotions. I personally think they use that as an excuse to explain their LACK of emotion, or rather, poor performance of emotion.

Hopefully, one day soon the TRUTH will be known about this case. And a lot of people will owe a lot of other people apologies - no matter which way or how it turns out. It's unfortunate that we must rely on the news media to get most of our information. But we have also been privy to first-hand information via Gerry's "blog" and their interviews/infomercials, in which I have never seen two parents so emotionless and stiff over the loss of their child. The facts speak for themselves on his blog and their interviews - facts that cannot be distorted or misrepresented or lost in the translation. They have put as much or more energy into making themselves look good and innocent as they have in trying to find their daughter, or admitting that they made a mistake.

Gatinho
01-19-2008, 02:14 PM
I have to say that everyone is focussing too much on the McCanns appearance. How do you know what happens to her eyes when she cries - whether they puff up or not. Everyone is different and react differently.

I think that Gerry's blog has been a PR disaster and also probably not always written by him. The trivia about where they have been and what they have been doing make it seem like they are just enjoying themselves.

I think that people are filling up the void created by the lack of action with their impressions about the parents which count for nothing in the end. Who cares if JT is not as good looking as the others - she certainly responded to the wonders of make up for her TV appearances. But in the end too much of this whole thing has been about image. Image is irrelevant. They are not film stars.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-19-2008, 02:34 PM
I have to say that everyone is focussing too much on the McCanns appearance. How do you know what happens to her eyes when she cries - whether they puff up or not. Everyone is different and react differently.

I think that Gerry's blog has been a PR disaster and also probably not always written by him. The trivia about where they have been and what they have been doing make it seem like they are just enjoying themselves.

I think that people are filling up the void created by the lack of action with their impressions about the parents which count for nothing in the end. Who cares if JT is not as good looking as the others - she certainly responded to the wonders of make up for her TV appearances. But in the end too much of this whole thing has been about image. Image is irrelevant. They are not film stars.

I hate to be the one to say it, but they, by their own doings, have made themselves into celebrities. Gerry is the Scot of the year, Kate the new pin-up girl and loving every minute of it. They have taken every single opportunity to show their face on every newspaper, and news channel in the world...(while showing off old and out dated pitures of their missing daughter)

Image is everything to the McCanns. If it's so important to them, then it is very important to the case of missing Madeleine McCann.

colomom
01-19-2008, 02:34 PM
I have to say that everyone is focussing too much on the McCanns appearance. How do you know what happens to her eyes when she cries - whether they puff up or not. Everyone is different and react differently.

I think that Gerry's blog has been a PR disaster and also probably not always written by him. The trivia about where they have been and what they have been doing make it seem like they are just enjoying themselves.

I think that people are filling up the void created by the lack of action with their impressions about the parents which count for nothing in the end. Who cares if JT is not as good looking as the others - she certainly responded to the wonders of make up for her TV appearances. But in the end too much of this whole thing has been about image. Image is irrelevant. They are not film stars.

Sorry but I totally disagree.

Just ONE example of the numerous articles written on the subject:

"Your public image represents who you are and what you do. It is a reflection of your private self image. If your self image needs an occasional boost, you can start by improving your public image. When you portray yourself to the world as confident and competent, you actually increase your self confidence and credibility. You achieve optimum results because people respond more positively." (from: http://www.fripp.com/article.yourimage.html)

The image that you portray has alot to do with how people perceive you. This is human nature. Whether or not it is fair is irrelevant. It is a fact.

For a couple who had PR people up the wahzoo they made some very poor decisions.

They may not be film stars but they are definitely in the public eye and that is exactly what they were trying to achieve.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-19-2008, 02:52 PM
It has been widely reported time and again that
Portuguese law forbids the use of private investigaters.

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache...lnk&cd=1&gl=au (http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:CwTJgVfJZsQJ:netk.net.au/Madeleine/Madeleine30.asp+Portuguese+LAW+and+private+investi gators&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=au)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../nmaddy124.xml (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/24/nmaddy124.xml)

Under Portuguese law, the McCanns are not allowed to carry out their own enquiries while the police investigation is ongoing. However, CRG is understood to be focusing on other countries, such as Spain and Morocco, where a number of possible sightings have been reported.
************
And Metodo are not working inside Portugal for the same reason.

************
I think Brian Kennedy, as well as others, have offered to help the McCanns because they believe them, care about Madeleine, and can afford it.
Last edited by april4sky : 01-16-2008 at 01:44 AM. Reason: Added

I didn't get a chance to comment on this before the last thread was locked. I do find it VERY odd that anyone could believe something reported in the news...:) It seems that we all pick and choose what we want to believe.

All this tells me is that PLE does not want the McCanns interviewing potential suspects or witnesses...which is understandable. It doesn't forbid them from doing a grid search of the area. It doesn't forbid then to leave no stone unturned. Which is what I meant by "SEARCHING" for Maddie (using volunteers on ATV's and horseback physically searching as I stated previously).

If that you insinuate is correct, they would have been arrested the day after Madeleine went missing when they where "walking hand in hand" calling Madeleine's name.

Gatinho
01-19-2008, 03:58 PM
Sorry but I totally disagree.

Just ONE example of the numerous articles written on the subject:

"Your public image represents who you are and what you do. It is a reflection of your private self image. If your self image needs an occasional boost, you can start by improving your public image. When you portray yourself to the world as confident and competent, you actually increase your self confidence and credibility. You achieve optimum results because people respond more positively." (from: http://www.fripp.com/article.yourimage.html)

The image that you portray has alot to do with how people perceive you. This is human nature. Whether or not it is fair is irrelevant. It is a fact.

For a couple who had PR people up the wahzoo they made some very poor decisions.

They may not be film stars but they are definitely in the public eye and that is exactly what they were trying to achieve.


Fair enough Colomom that you disagree - but the article you quote is about guidance for professionals in their working environment.

I am not keen on the McCanns, I think if I knew them I would not like them very much because they show signs of being quite self absorbed and Gerry particularly seem to have his emotion chip switched off (ref: Star Trek). BUT that has nothing to do with their culpability for Madeleines (we assume) death.

I would cite the treatment that Robert Murat has had ... squinting, sweaty, twitchy, strange, odd and so on. That is his 'public image' and what does that count for? Probably nothing. Probably innocent.

So I am sticking to my guns and saying that I don't care if she bought new earrings before seeing the Pope. Its not what everyone would have done - then speaking personally the Pope is the last person I would have wanted to meet in those circumstances.

colomom
01-19-2008, 04:04 PM
Fair enough Colomom that you disagree - but the article you quote is about guidance for professionals in their working environment.


Understood Gatinho. I probably should have just highlighted the first sentence. That was the main idea I was trying to get across. I was hoping most would get the gist of my meaning.

I happen to agree with you that too much attention has been paid to insignificant things in this case. However, we are a group that has been very dedicated to continuing the discussion about Maddie and her disappearance in an effort to not let her be forgotten and to insure that SHE gets the justice she deserves.

If we have to have discussions like these in order to achieve that, then so be it.

Just keep talking......

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-19-2008, 04:24 PM
I would like to discuss the love/hate relationship the McCanns have with the country of Portugal. When they went on Holiday, they surely took time researching places to go with 3 toddlers. SURELY, they did an Internet search of the country, and the area to find out how child friendly it was. There is a giant planet called Earth that has many affordable, and safe family sunny beach areas...

They WANTED to go there, they chose to go there, they paid good money to go there, and admitted they felt safe there...

BUT NOW...it apparently is chocked full of paedophiles, gypsies, creeps, dodgy men, corrupt police, and apparently kidnappers. How could they not have known this prior to leaving if they bothered to research?

So why did they go there? of all places in the world? They have nothing but horrible things to say about it.

colomom
01-19-2008, 04:47 PM
I would like to discuss the love/hate relationship the McCanns have with the country of Portugal. When they went on Holiday, they surely took time researching places to go with 3 toddlers. SURELY, they did an Internet search of the country, and the area to find out how child friendly it was. There is a giant planet called Earth that has many affordable, and safe family sunny beach areas...

They WANTED to go there, they chose to go there, they paid good money to go there, and admitted they felt safe there...

BUT NOW...it apparently is chocked full of paedophiles, gypsies, creeps, dodgy men, corrupt police, and apparently kidnappers. How could they not have known this prior to leaving if they bothered to research?

So why did they go there? of all places in the world? They have nothing but horrible things to say about it.

Maybe because.....

"The McCanns are believed to have stayed once before in Praia da Luz and had returned because they considered it a safe resort. According to a member of staff, the McCanns were so confident of safety that they left the french doors to their apartment unlocked when their children were alone last Thursday week."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21725163-2703,00.html

ThoughtFox
01-19-2008, 05:24 PM
Actually people, the McCann's did party (sort of). There is a difference between say a dinner party and a New Year's Eve party but the McCanns did alot of socializing with friends and, strangely enough, they often went to see their friends at their houses rather than having them come to the villa. So it appears that they spent alot of time going visiting rather than having people come visit them (other than family). They also managed to squeeze in some sightseeing.

. . . I have also read reports that KM spent alot of time in local bars following Maddie's disappearance. Those reports are unsubstantiated and rumor but, nevertheless they are out there.

We can quibble over the meaning of these terms, partying and sightseeing, but the point is that many people find the McCann's behavior to be very different than what they think they might experience if they were in their shoes.
And remember the friend of theirs said?

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=474656&in_page_id=1770

The group of nine were holidaying in Portugal and wanted to have a good time. As one of the doctors, Matthew Oldfield, was to recall: "We drank. So what! We were on holiday."

We can quibble over the semantics (the meaning of each individual word) but the "overall" meaning is that at the end of the day, these people were there to have a good time/party/drink.

As far as the clothes/jewelry/hair, for some of us who watched this unfold since last September, the first time I ever saw Kate on television after they were made arquidoes, I was impressed by how "together" she looked. I hadn't been watching her since the beginning, but as the days went by I noticed that every time they showed her she had on a new outfit. Presumably, those clothes didn't just walk into her closet - she had to go shopping to have that many clothes in a foreign country away from home.

I don't usually notice people's jewelry or hair, but I never saw her looking anything but immaculate.

ThoughtFox
01-19-2008, 05:29 PM
I would like to discuss the love/hate relationship the McCanns have with the country of Portugal. When they went on Holiday, they surely took time researching places to go with 3 toddlers. SURELY, they did an Internet search of the country, and the area to find out how child friendly it was. There is a giant planet called Earth that has many affordable, and safe family sunny beach areas...

They WANTED to go there, they chose to go there, they paid good money to go there, and admitted they felt safe there...

BUT NOW...it apparently is chocked full of paedophiles, gypsies, creeps, dodgy men, corrupt police, and apparently kidnappers. How could they not have known this prior to leaving if they bothered to research?

So why did they go there? of all places in the world? They have nothing but horrible things to say about it.
I guess we are supposed to believe that they were misinformed.

It's like Humphrey Bogart in Casablanca when he tells the Inspector:

"I came here for the waters."
"We're in the desert."
"I was misinformed."

The McCanns:

"We came here because it was so safe, like our backgarden."
"This is a foreign country full of pedophiles with the keystone cops in charge."
"Whoops - we were misinformed and should have locked the door."

:rolleyes:


Also, there were those friends who urged them to go on this trip because they had stayed at Mark Warner before. And then there were those friends who "suggested" they leave all the kids alone at night.

It was peer pressure, you know. :crazy:

colomom
01-19-2008, 06:01 PM
You know, I think they did research their trip and destination. They found that MW, PDL and Portugal has/had an excellent reputation for family friendly and family safe vacations.

The way they have allowed the media to bad-mouth this country is really irresponsible. Portugal went all out to help and support the McCanns and they often sang their praises.....before they became arguidos.

At that point they shut-up and let their mouthpiece do the talking, and you know how effective he has been (heavy sarcasm) http://planetsmilies.net/angry-smiley-303.gif

colomom
01-19-2008, 06:21 PM
I guess we are supposed to believe that they were misinformed.

It's like Humphrey Bogart in Casablanca when he tells the Inspector:

"I came here for the waters."
"We're in the desert."
"I was misinformed."

The McCanns:

"We came here because it was so safe, like our backgarden."
"This is a foreign country full of pedophiles with the keystone cops in charge."
"Whoops - we were misinformed and should have locked the door."

:rolleyes:


Also, there were those friends who urged them to go on this trip because they had stayed at Mark Warner before. And then there were those friends who "suggested" they leave all the kids alone at night.

It was peer pressure, you know. :crazy:

http://planetsmilies.net/happy-smiley-611.gif

Gotta love that peer pressure (heeheehee).

Barnaby
01-19-2008, 08:18 PM
Do you have a RELIABLE source that says she bought new jewellry and had her hair highlighted? I havent seen that as a FACT anywhere :confused:
I am afraid that you will have to trawl through old articles for the information, I don't have the time but it has been posted before!

Texana
01-19-2008, 08:48 PM
Yes, I remember reading about the jewelry for the papal visit, but it's been several weeks/a couple of months now. It's way back in the early articles or blogs.

Whether or not Gerry actually wrote the words in the blog, he approved them. (Like the political ads in the United States that now legally have to end in the words, "I'm Joe McCandidate, and I approve this message.")

Gerry approved those words on his blog, and honestly, having read his comments for months, and his general style of response, I have to tell you that they are either his words, or taken from his notes. They were not fabricated out of thin air and then published without his approval and knowledge.

Even if you believe that Maddie truly was abducted, you have to concede that their actions in the days after her disappearance were as self-centered and absorbed in their own selves, as their actions the day she went missing.

At least they are consistently self-centered people.

Texana
01-19-2008, 08:54 PM
I can concede that Kate would not necessarily show signs of crying or looking grief-ravaged in photos.

But again, it was Kate who said herself after the first night "I sleep fine."

Not "well, the first night I didn't sleep at all, but I'm so exhausted from our efforts during the day I sleep fine at night" or "I really don't have any problem sleeping, I have to keep my strength up and so I try to make sure I sleep well" but a flat, almost defiant, "I sleep fine."

So of course she looks rested and can run as usual, etc. She sleeps fine.

Explain it as you like, but whatever the explanation you choose, Kate doesn't lie awake at night wondering where her child is or how she's being treated.

Salem
01-19-2008, 09:15 PM
Okay guys - to follow up on a question Colomom asked a few posts back - what did the McCanns do to "leave no stone unturned" to find Maddie?

I am asking this seriously and sincerely and requesting there be no sarcasm or rebuttals until we have a good long laundry list of anything positive that can be verified by some kind of link or media information. We already have a good list of the negatives in the "I would believe them if not for....." thread.

For me, the truth of the matter is the McCanns appear to be well connected and I think some positive things happened in this search almost immediately. Whether these things happened in a "positive" light for the McCanns is debateable, but I do think there may be some lessons to be learned here that could potentially be used in future cases.

I'll start. I think the first thing they did was alert the media. We all know when looking for a missing person the sooner the media gets the news the better. I also know there are some negatives about this early alert, but please let's save that discussion for later.

The second thing they did was establish a "fund" to deal with all the contributions. Again, I know this fund is debateable, but I think that has to do with how they set the fund up and we can save that discussion for later also.

Okay - what else have they done to look under those stones?

Thanks,

Salem

Texana
01-19-2008, 09:27 PM
Some reports that they were walking the beaches/streets calling Madeleine's name the first night.

They made a trip to Huelva and put up some posters (most businesses were closed due to holiday).

They made at least one trip to the shrine at Fatima, presumably to pray for Madeleine's return.

They had her picture blessed by the Pope.

They engaged in and helped arrange various media publicity events to keep Madeleine's name/face in the public view, such as the balloon launch and the pipers' concert.

There were some public appeals by celebrities in Britain for Maddie's return; I don't know in how many countries those appeals were televised.

What have I left out?

colomom
01-19-2008, 09:41 PM
Okay guys - to follow up on a question Colomom asked a few posts back - what did the McCanns do to "leave no stone unturned" to find Maddie?

I am asking this seriously and sincerely and requesting there be no sarcasm or rebuttals until we have a good long laundry list of anything positive that can be verified by some kind of link or media information. We already have a good list of the negatives in the "I would believe them if not for....." thread.

For me, the truth of the matter is the McCanns appear to be well connected and I think some positive things happened in this search almost immediately. Whether these things happened in a "positive" light for the McCanns is debateable, but I do think there may be some lessons to be learned here that could potentially be used in future cases.

I'll start. I think the first thing they did was alert the media. We all know when looking for a missing person the sooner the media gets the news the better. I also know there are some negatives about this early alert, but please let's save that discussion for later.

The second thing they did was establish a "fund" to deal with all the contributions. Again, I know this fund is debateable, but I think that has to do with how they set the fund up and we can save that discussion for later also.

Okay - what else have they done to look under those stones?

Thanks,

Salem

Hi Salem (had to get that in :) )

They set-up a website....

I SWEAR that is NOT sarcastic....

Barnaby
01-19-2008, 11:20 PM
I can concede that Kate would not necessarily show signs of crying or looking grief-ravaged in photos.

But again, it was Kate who said herself after the first night "I sleep fine."

Not "well, the first night I didn't sleep at all, but I'm so exhausted from our efforts during the day I sleep fine at night" or "I really don't have any problem sleeping, I have to keep my strength up and so I try to make sure I sleep well" but a flat, almost defiant, "I sleep fine."

So of course she looks rested and can run as usual, etc. She sleeps fine.

Explain it as you like, but whatever the explanation you choose, Kate doesn't lie awake at night wondering where her child is or how she's being treated.


How the heck could any mother sleep at all never mind fine thinking that her baby might be with pedophiles? Baffles me!
If I was in this position the only time I would sleep well would be if I was stuffed full of sleeping pills or heavy tranquilisers! Seriously have you ever tossed & turned all blooming night over a small problem? I sure have!

txsvicki
01-20-2008, 01:24 AM
I can't imagine a mother even answering such a ridiculous question. Most people would get angry. Of course, her answer tells a lot about her.

april4sky
01-20-2008, 01:53 AM
I didn't get a chance to comment on this before the last thread was locked. I do find it VERY odd that anyone could believe something reported in the news...:) It seems that we all pick and choose what we want to believe.

All this tells me is that PLE does not want the McCanns interviewing potential suspects or witnesses...which is understandable. It doesn't forbid them from doing a grid search of the area. It doesn't forbid then to leave no stone unturned. Which is what I meant by "SEARCHING" for Maddie (using volunteers on ATV's and horseback physically searching as I stated previously).

If that you insinuate is correct, they would have been arrested the day after Madeleine went missing when they where "walking hand in hand" calling Madeleine's name.I couldn't agree with you more on the above bolded. :) And that choice is probably determined too for different reasons.

april4sky
01-20-2008, 02:06 AM
***Warning...Graphic***
Are you talking about Leonor Cipiano? The mother who was having an incestuous relationship with her brother Joao? Who both sexually abused little Joana, with witnesses to prove she was assaulted, and large amounts of her blood found in their refrigerator? The one who confessed to the murder to her father, and the brother confessed to his attorney? The one who chopped up her daughter and put body parts into junk yard scrap cars that where then crushed and shipped to Spain for recycling?

Have you read the Cipriano trial files? They are available for anyone who is interested in reading what facts were, proved before the judge and jury. The Ciprianos were not convicted because the PJ forced a confession out of them. Confessions...even signed confessions, can be retracted at any point during a trial, and actually rendered invalid and useless. The Ciprianos were convicted because the confession that Mr Cipriano made and signed in front of his own lawyer, detailed the murder and dismemberment of his niece's body. The police then worked from these details backwards, searching for forensic evidence, (led by Joao himself) to corroborate the confession. Once they knew where to look and what to look for, according to Mr Cipriano's "instructions", they found the evidence that ultimately convicted the "couple". It was more than enough for a conviction, even without a body.

Any scum bag POS woman who is capable of doing what she did to her own daughter, is also capable of lying about police brutality...


Yes I was talking about Leonor Cipiano.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=461111&in_page_id=1770


The detective leading the hunt for Madeleine McCann has sensationally been charged over his conduct in another missing child case.

Goncalo Amaral, head of the regional Judicial Police, is one of five officers accused over the beating-up of a suspect during questioning.
They are said to have attacked Leonor Cipriano, whose nine-year-old daughter Joana vanished from the Algarve in 2004.

************
Take a close look at the picture of Leonor Cipiano after she was beaten while in police custody. :eek:
Would you trust Goncalo Amaral?

april4sky
01-20-2008, 02:29 AM
I have to say that everyone is focussing too much on the McCanns appearance. How do you know what happens to her eyes when she cries - whether they puff up or not. Everyone is different and react differently.

I think that Gerry's blog has been a PR disaster and also probably not always written by him. The trivia about where they have been and what they have been doing make it seem like they are just enjoying themselves.

I think that people are filling up the void created by the lack of action with their impressions about the parents which count for nothing in the end. Who cares if JT is not as good looking as the others - she certainly responded to the wonders of make up for her TV appearances. But in the end too much of this whole thing has been about image. Image is irrelevant. They are not film stars.I agree :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: . It's all too easy to turn everything they say and do, or even look like into something sinister. Even Kates pictures with her wearing simple summer tops. Its a good job she isn't caught wearing designer labels.

Gatinho
01-20-2008, 08:05 AM
Yes I was talking about Leonor Cipiano.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=461111&in_page_id=1770


The detective leading the hunt for Madeleine McCann has sensationally been charged over his conduct in another missing child case.

Goncalo Amaral, head of the regional Judicial Police, is one of five officers accused over the beating-up of a suspect during questioning.
They are said to have attacked Leonor Cipriano, whose nine-year-old daughter Joana vanished from the Algarve in 2004.

************
Take a close look at the picture of Leonor Cipiano after she was beaten while in police custody. :eek:
Would you trust Goncalo Amaral?

Amaral is not accused of beating anyone up but of not properly investigating the accusations. Possibly covering them up. Again its all image. Amaral looks like a bit of a slob and takes long lunch-breaks. His dismissal followed him speaking to the media when he had been told not to and had nothing to do with the Cipriano case.

Lets get things straight. We don't know who caused the back eyes or why. She might have been attacked by other prisoners - that happens all the time. In any case it has no bearing on the McCann case. It is a distraction.

april4sky
01-20-2008, 08:33 AM
Amaral is not accused of beating anyone up but of not properly investigating the accusations. Possibly covering them up. Again its all image. Amaral looks like a bit of a slob and takes long lunch-breaks. His dismissal followed him speaking to the media when he had been told not to and had nothing to do with the Cipriano case.

Lets get things straight. We don't know who caused the back eyes or why. She might have been attacked by other prisoners - that happens all the time. In any case it has no bearing on the McCann case. It is a distraction.It was serious enough that he and others have been charged.
I am aware that this case is not the reason he was removed from Madeleine's case.
I don't believe its a distraction either but disturbing when you consider the way he has run this investigation.

Gatinho
01-20-2008, 11:05 AM
It was serious enough that he and others have been charged.
I am aware that this case is not the reason he was removed from Madeleine's case.
I don't believe its a distraction either but disturbing when you consider the way he has run this investigation.

The PJ has faced a lot of criticism over the handling of this case. But I don't think all of it is justified. Failure to secure the apartment would be one justified complaint. However most of the comments have come from British ex-policemen who are not actually in possession of all the facts. Given that suspicion fell on the McCanns after the cadaver dogs and DNA were introduced by British police (and such resources were not available to the PJ) I would discount the McCanns own reaction 'were being framed' and so on, as panic.

The forensics are being done in the UK also, so you can't blame the PJ for asking questions based on this evidence. But you can blame the McCanns for refusing to answer and then running away to England. If they really want to be cleared then there is one simple way - go back to Portugal and volunteer to answer all questions - if there are simple easy explanations then they should have no fear - until they do this their actions are unjustified.

Salem
01-20-2008, 11:08 AM
Some reports that they were walking the beaches/streets calling Madeleine's name the first night.

They made a trip to Huelva and put up some posters (most businesses were closed due to holiday).

They made at least one trip to the shrine at Fatima, presumably to pray for Madeleine's return.

They had her picture blessed by the Pope.

They engaged in and helped arrange various media publicity events to keep Madeleine's name/face in the public view, such as the balloon launch and the pipers' concert.

There were some public appeals by celebrities in Britain for Maddie's return; I don't know in how many countries those appeals were televised.

What have I left out?

And Colomom pointed out that they made a website.:rolleyes:

My point in all this was to see if there was anything we might be able to use in future missing person cases. Anyway you slice this cake, the reality is that Maddie is in the news media EVERY DAY - even though she has been missing for almost 9 months. I think that must be some kind of record.......

The only unusual things I see are the visit to the Pope and the celebrities. I don't suppose we could get the Pope for other missing children unless they were Catholic - but maybe we could find a celebrity or two to become "spokespersons" for missing folks (kids and adults). Obviously that gets a lot of media attention and even magazine interviews.

I know this is slightly off-topic - sorry for my digression.:)

Salem

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-20-2008, 11:17 AM
It was serious enough that he and others have been charged.
I am aware that this case is not the reason he was removed from Madeleine's case.
I don't believe its a distraction either but disturbing when you consider the way he has run this investigation.

I think it is odd, that in the beginning of Gerrys blog, he had MANY good things to say about the PLE. Seriously, we need to look things over again. I believe it wasn't until the McCanns were made formal suspects did the tide turn.

I'll look at the dates of the news articles where friend came out saying the McCanns were disturbed with the PLE preformance on the first night...Were they printed BEFORE or AFTER they were made arquidoes? (I'm not sure, myself...)

Texana
01-20-2008, 11:27 AM
The papal visit wasn't quite as special as it was presented, they didn't actually meet with the Pope one on one or speak personally or privately with him.

They were in a group, he came by, they had a photo of Maddie and he blessed it, may have blessed them as well, same for the rest of the group. More along the lines of a "meet and greet" kind of event, if that makes sense.

It is a little unusual that they were able to get even that on such short notice, but my guess is they were added to an already scheduled group of British citizens via the Foreign Office connections.

Lanie
01-20-2008, 11:29 AM
I wanted to touch on the question of "what would you do" if your child came up missing.
There's at least 2 sides to this. We have people belonging to this site who have a child missing, and years have gone by. There are people like John Walsh, who has been a very public figure, and though his son's body was eventually found, he was still missing for quite some time. Natalie Holloway's mom, Lacey Peterson's family, etc.
Then you have people like Susan Smith.
I am not completely accurate on the details, but my friend is in this situation. In 1980, in Alaska, her daughter left with her boyfriend to go to a concert. No trace of her has been found since. She has told me how she spent years physically searching for her daughter almost every single day. She is a functioning drunk, and she makes no apologies. Most of the time she believes her daughter is dead, but every now and then she hopes she ran away and doesn't want to be found, even though they were very close and there is not one shred of motive for her to have done this. She tells me to be sober would be for her to go insane. She has grieved for her daughter for the last 28 years. And just to address the whole IVF of Maddie, this daughter was adopted. I did not meet this woman until the late '90's, but knowing her as I do, I don't believe for a minute when her daughter disappeared she ever gave a ***** about highlighting her hair, she probably didn't even care if she combed it.
I knew another woman when I was a kid and we first moved back to Texas. Her 13-year-old granddaughter was abducted, and some time later her remains were found in a rock quarry. I first met her abut 2 years later. She was a woman who had the elaborate beehive hairdo, and put her makeup on with a trowel. I was 12, and could even see then the grief she carried with her constantly. I visited her a lot, and not once could she talk to me about her granddaughter without tears.
Yes, I think the McCann's are guilty in the disappearance of their daughter. In my opinion, their words, actions, and general attitude screams "COVERUP". I think they believe they have covered their tracks well enough to never be charged and convicted, and unfortunately, I also believe they are right. To me this is the equivalant of a slap in the face to every person out there who has loved and cared for their child, and had some outside party steal that child away from them. These people, at least the ones I know of, have always from the very first found some way to twist logic to blame themselves, "If I hadn't let her go," "If I hadn't looked away", "If I had gone to the laundromat the day before", etc., while the McCann's are, "We did nothing wrong."
To all of you who think the McCann's are not guilty, you are entitled to your opinion. I concede there is no concrete evidence to prove they were involved, but point out there is also no concrete evidence to prove anyone else was involved, either, so both sides of this issue are based on supposition.
Lanie

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-20-2008, 11:50 AM
Dear Lanie,

Thank you SO much for your post. You touched on many things that I think many of us believe. For anyone who is interested in reading a heart breaking case of a mothers love and struggle to find her missing daughter of 35 years, please visit this thread:
Searching for Anna Christian Waters
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=104

After reading it, you will see why the McCanns get on my nerves so much!

colomom
01-20-2008, 01:08 PM
I wanted to touch on the question of "what would you do" if your child came up missing.
There's at least 2 sides to this. We have people belonging to this site who have a child missing, and years have gone by. There are people like John Walsh, who has been a very public figure, and though his son's body was eventually found, he was still missing for quite some time. Natalie Holloway's mom, Lacey Peterson's family, etc.
Then you have people like Susan Smith.
I am not completely accurate on the details, but my friend is in this situation. In 1980, in Alaska, her daughter left with her boyfriend to go to a concert. No trace of her has been found since. She has told me how she spent years physically searching for her daughter almost every single day. She is a functioning drunk, and she makes no apologies. Most of the time she believes her daughter is dead, but every now and then she hopes she ran away and doesn't want to be found, even though they were very close and there is not one shred of motive for her to have done this. She tells me to be sober would be for her to go insane. She has grieved for her daughter for the last 28 years. And just to address the whole IVF of Maddie, this daughter was adopted. I did not meet this woman until the late '90's, but knowing her as I do, I don't believe for a minute when her daughter disappeared she ever gave a ***** about highlighting her hair, she probably didn't even care if she combed it.
I knew another woman when I was a kid and we first moved back to Texas. Her 13-year-old granddaughter was abducted, and some time later her remains were found in a rock quarry. I first met her abut 2 years later. She was a woman who had the elaborate beehive hairdo, and put her makeup on with a trowel. I was 12, and could even see then the grief she carried with her constantly. I visited her a lot, and not once could she talk to me about her granddaughter without tears.
Yes, I think the McCann's are guilty in the disappearance of their daughter. In my opinion, their words, actions, and general attitude screams "COVERUP". I think they believe they have covered their tracks well enough to never be charged and convicted, and unfortunately, I also believe they are right. To me this is the equivalant of a slap in the face to every person out there who has loved and cared for their child, and had some outside party steal that child away from them. These people, at least the ones I know of, have always from the very first found some way to twist logic to blame themselves, "If I hadn't let her go," "If I hadn't looked away", "If I had gone to the laundromat the day before", etc., while the McCann's are, "We did nothing wrong."
To all of you who think the McCann's are not guilty, you are entitled to your opinion. I concede there is no concrete evidence to prove they were involved, but point out there is also no concrete evidence to prove anyone else was involved, either, so both sides of this issue are based on supposition.
Lanie

AWESOME post Lanie. Couldn't have said it better myself :blowkiss:

Barnaby
01-20-2008, 02:09 PM
Wonderful post Lanie!!

colomom
01-20-2008, 02:47 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvNkYRfQAv8

I don't endorse, I just post so you can see for yourself and make your own judgements.

daffodil
01-20-2008, 03:08 PM
I am going to stick to the premise innocent until PROVEN guilty.

SleuthMom
01-20-2008, 03:33 PM
I am going to stick to the premise innocent until PROVEN guilty.

I would love to think that way, their arguido status does not allow me to think this way as yet.

colomom
01-20-2008, 03:44 PM
I am going to stick to the premise innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Does that mean in a court of law? Or "proven" by a preponderance of the evidence?

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-20-2008, 04:02 PM
I am going to stick to the premise innocent until PROVEN guilty.

I just have to ask this, please don't take it to sound mean. But if this whole mess ever goes to trial, in Portugal, and the Judge feels the PLE has proven them guilty, and sends the McCanns to prison, will you believe it? Would you be satisfied? If not, what would the proof need to be? A confession? Would you feel the confession was forced, or coressed? What would it take?

Bandini
01-20-2008, 04:06 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvNkYRfQAv8

I don't endorse, I just post so you can see for yourself and make your own judgements.

The one following the Hitler spoof (The real Madeleine Mccann story. Questions that need answers) brings up some good questions.

daffodil
01-20-2008, 04:33 PM
Does that mean in a court of law? Or "proven" by a preponderance of the evidence?

Well both really as they would present evidence in court.

daffodil
01-20-2008, 04:38 PM
I just have to ask this, please don't take it to sound mean. But if this whole mess ever goes to trial, in Portugal, and the Judge feels the PLE has proven them guilty, and sends the McCanns to prison, will you believe it? Would you be satisfied? If not, what would the proof need to be? A confession? Would you feel the confession was forced, or coressed? What would it take?

It would depend on the evidence presented,if it was incontrovertible then yes I would accept it.At the moment I have seen nothing to say they are guilty and I wont judge them on clothes and jewellry.

colomom
01-20-2008, 04:43 PM
I just have to ask this, please don't take it to sound mean. But if this whole mess ever goes to trial, in Portugal, and the Judge feels the PLE has proven them guilty, and sends the McCanns to prison, will you believe it? Would you be satisfied? If not, what would the proof need to be? A confession? Would you feel the confession was forced, or coressed? What would it take?

You bring up an excellent point IW and I have thought about this alot.

If the McCanns are charged and go to trail and are found innocent, will the people who have thought they were directly involved in her disappearance think:

A. That there is some kind of conspiracy involving very powerful people who paid off the judge?

B. The McCanns got away with it?

C. The PJ failed to do their job and bungled the case?

OR????

And if the McCanns are charged and go to trail and are found guilty, will the people who have thought they were in no way involved in her disappearance think:

A. They were framed by the Portuguese LE?

B. That Maddie is still alive and being held somewhere?

C. That the evidence was bogus?

OR????

If they were found to be innocent of manslaughter (or whatever) and disposing of a corpse would people still demand (or expect) that they face charges for neglect? Or would people say they have suffered enough?

I am afraid that no matter what happens, short of a confession, people will not be satisfied. The longer this drags on the more stubborn people will become about what they believe happened.

It will never end....

colomom
01-20-2008, 04:59 PM
Well both really as they would present evidence in court.

I realize that the evidence would be presented in court however, what if the evidence was laid out prior to trial? Would you think that the evidence was bogus if it implicated the McCanns? Or would you accept it?

What I am envisioning is that the PJ present DNA evidence that points at Madeleine's corpse being in the Scenic. Would you believe it?

It has been reported in the media for months now. What would it take to convince you? What sort of official information would you need?

Just asking....

daffodil
01-20-2008, 05:13 PM
I realize that the evidence would be presented in court however, what if the evidence was laid out prior to trial? Would you think that the evidence was bogus if it implicated the McCanns? Or would you accept it?

What I am envisioning is that the PJ present DNA evidence that points at Madeleine's corpse being in the Scenic. Would you believe it?

It has been reported in the media for months now. What would it take to convince you? What sort of official information would you need?

Just asking....

TBH I dont know.A lot would depend on the source of the evidence and I tend not to pay too much attention to the media either reports for OR against the McCanns

Lanie
01-20-2008, 05:43 PM
I am going to stick to the premise innocent until PROVEN guilty.

That is a court provision to help ensure people get a fair trial. There is quite a difference between the opinions of people in an online sleuthing forum and the restrictions imposed in a court of law. If this went to trial tomorrow in the US, and I was picked to serve on the jury, and the only evidence against them was what I have PERSONALLY used to come to my opinion of their involvement, I would be forced to vote 'not guilty'.
However, I live in the US, and here, we are still entitled to our opinions on a person's guilt or innocence, even if it is based on the phase of the moon on the 12th of September.

And for the record, it is my personal opinion OJ is guilty, my personal opinion the Ramsey's are guilty, and I am still on the fence about what happened to Trenton Duckett, but I lean way far over to his mom is guilty.
Lanie

april4sky
01-21-2008, 02:00 AM
You bring up an excellent point IW and I have thought about this alot.

If the McCanns are charged and go to trail and are found innocent, will the people who have thought they were directly involved in her disappearance think:

A. That there is some kind of conspiracy involving very powerful people who paid off the judge?

B. The McCanns got away with it?

C. The PJ failed to do their job and bungled the case?

OR????

And if the McCanns are charged and go to trail and are found guilty, will the people who have thought they were in no way involved in her disappearance think:

A. They were framed by the Portuguese LE?

B. That Maddie is still alive and being held somewhere?

C. That the evidence was bogus?

OR????

If they were found to be innocent of manslaughter (or whatever) and disposing of a corpse would people still demand (or expect) that they face charges for neglect? Or would people say they have suffered enough?

I am afraid that no matter what happens, short of a confession, people will not be satisfied. The longer this drags on the more stubborn people will become about what they believe happened.

It will never end....I would accept if they were found guilty if DNA proof of a dead Madeleine was found and they were able to link it to the McCanns. I wouldn't have a problem with that. I would trust the UK lab results. At this point I really don't trust the PLE.
I think you will have as many answers as there are possibilities.
The only outcome we can all agree on is the hope that Madeleine will be found....alive and well.

CourtScribe
01-21-2008, 10:16 AM
These people NEVER LOOKED for their daughter!!! What they did instead:
+Within 48 hours 2 UK lawyers were flown to Portugal to consult with McCann's
+Within days, website asking for DONATIONS was established!
+UK government began protecting them from negative investigation!
+Sky news was called by Kate? Gerry? relative? even before they contacted the police!
+Their contacts enabled a media blitz of only positive information about them and missing daughter - no negative information, such as they purposefully left their children every night alone to dine/drink alone, even to a restaurant several miles away!
+Website began selling items with Madeleine's name!
+Innumerable photo ops of them around town and elsewhere - all prearranged. Interviews were controlled by only certain questions allowed; they demanded 2 hours notice of what questions were to be asked in order to allow time to prepare their answers!
+They hired SPOKESPERSONS to speak for them to the press!
All of the above were within the first few weeks! As time proceeded, McCann's expanded their publicity throughout Europe, Morocco, etc.
I emailed the PJ chief after a couple of months outlining the above emphasizing the fact THEY THEMSELVES NEVER LOOKED FOR MADELEINE!!
Kathleen

Salem
01-21-2008, 01:04 PM
I will only accept that the McCanns were not involved if LE can show who was involved or produce Maddie.

GM's comment to "find the body and prove it" gave him special status as a suspect in my mind. I can not fathom a parent saying this about their missing child, no matter how frustrated they were. AND it leads me to believe there is some connection with the pet cremation facility that has been reported several times.

I think the PJ know what happened to Maddie and I'm hoping they find enough evidence to prove it beyond a "shadow of a doubt." When all is said and done, I really want to have all my questions about what happened answered.

Salem

daffodil
01-21-2008, 05:15 PM
These people NEVER LOOKED for their daughter!!! What they did instead:
+Within 48 hours 2 UK lawyers were flown to Portugal to consult with McCann's
+Within days, website asking for DONATIONS was established!
+UK government began protecting them from negative investigation!
+Sky news was called by Kate? Gerry? relative? even before they contacted the police!
+Their contacts enabled a media blitz of only positive information about them and missing daughter - no negative information, such as they purposefully left their children every night alone to dine/drink alone, even to a restaurant several miles away!
+Website began selling items with Madeleine's name!
+Innumerable photo ops of them around town and elsewhere - all prearranged. Interviews were controlled by only certain questions allowed; they demanded 2 hours notice of what questions were to be asked in order to allow time to prepare their answers!
+They hired SPOKESPERSONS to speak for them to the press!
All of the above were within the first few weeks! As time proceeded, McCann's expanded their publicity throughout Europe, Morocco, etc.
I emailed the PJ chief after a couple of months outlining the above emphasizing the fact THEY THEMSELVES NEVER LOOKED FOR MADELEINE!!
Kathleen

1) Do you have a link re the lawyers called within 48 hours? I dont recall that TIA
2) I dont believe they did the set up of the website themselves did they? I dont see anything sinister in it anyway.
3) The UK gov did not protect them from investigation.
4) Neither of the McCanns contacted the media personally.
5) The world knew they had left the children alone so why would they mention it? I fail to see what is wrong with using what contacts you may have to help find your child and keep her in the headlines.
6) Whilst not what everyone would do it doesnt make them killers.
7) Do you have the link for them asking for the questions in advance because if that is true why didnt they have answers to them all? Why were some unanswered?

You emailed the Chief of Police to ask him why the police werent looking for Madeleine?:eek:

colomom
01-21-2008, 10:27 PM
1) Do you have a link re the lawyers called within 48 hours? I dont recall that TIA
2) I dont believe they did the set up of the website themselves did they? I dont see anything sinister in it anyway.
3) The UK gov did not protect them from investigation.
4) Neither of the McCanns contacted the media personally.
5) The world knew they had left the children alone so why would they mention it? I fail to see what is wrong with using what contacts you may have to help find your child and keep her in the headlines.
6) Whilst not what everyone would do it doesnt make them killers.
7) Do you have the link for them asking for the questions in advance because if that is true why didnt they have answers to them all? Why were some unanswered?

You emailed the Chief of Police to ask him why the police werent looking for Madeleine?:eek:

Daffodil, do you have links (or something to back-up your statements)?

3) The UK gov did not protect them from investigation.
How do you know that?

4) Neither of the McCanns contacted the media personally.
How do you know that?

Texana
01-21-2008, 10:36 PM
They set up the website themselves, relatives of the McCanns (Gerry's) maintained and set it up.

There's no secret in that.

Barnaby
01-21-2008, 11:02 PM
Interesting thread on the mirror forums about the girl that is missing in Spain:

http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=38023

Bandini
01-22-2008, 07:50 AM
from the thread:
[

Something not right with this and it is Huelva again. If this disappearance is not genuine I believe it has either been orchestrated by Team Mccann or someone in Mari-Luz's family has seen how much money can be made out of a missing child. I have posted a couple of times on this forum that this has been a concern of mine. People hear about the money to be made and the temptation is just too great. This is not a very pc statement but come on we all know that Gypsies put their kids to good use. i.e begging and pickpocketing. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that they have taken money from someone to put on a bogus kidnapping. I hope I'm right and this is all a fake and no real harm has come to Mari-Luz

Hang on to your shorts and flame away (:eek:), but I had the same suspicions when I first heard about this latest "abduction". With all of their worldly connections, and how some of the "facts" and witness statements are continue to be edited to their advantage, I would not be surprised if this "abduction" is fake - orchestrated by team McCann to reinforce their claim that Maddie was abducted. I'm NOT saying they have done this - but I am saying I would not be surprised if that's what this is all about.

Gatinho
01-22-2008, 08:07 AM
This website SOS Maddie has this (its in French)

http://tinyurl.com/yuu697

"The Judicial Police has not reacted officially to the sketch revealed by the press conference organized by the McCanns and is still performing procedures. The Police knows when and how Madeleine has been taken away from the apartment but also where she has been during the first days."

No idea how reliable this is - but that's the first time that I have heard that the PJ know where she was for the first few days!

Sorry if you have seen this already but ...

gord
01-22-2008, 08:23 AM
from the thread:


Hang on to your shorts and flame away (:eek:), but I had the same suspicions when I first heard about this latest "abduction". With all of their worldly connections, and how some of the "facts" and witness statements are continue to be edited to their advantage, I would not be surprised if this "abduction" is fake - orchestrated by team McCann to reinforce their claim that Maddie was abducted. I'm NOT saying they have done this - but I am saying I would not be surprised if that's what this is all about.

I have heard it all now - this girls abduction is down to the Mccaans ?? sorry - I know you are not saying this is the case - but obviously other forums are - we now seem to be entering la la land :crazy:

daffodil
01-22-2008, 09:26 AM
I have heard it all now - this girls abduction is down to the Mccaans ?? sorry - I know you are not saying this is the case - but obviously other forums are - we now seem to be entering la la land :crazy:

ROFL yep thats what you do when your child is missing,go out and nick one yourselves:eek: Us English are known for it :crazy: Geez those people really need to get out more :D :D :D

colomom
01-22-2008, 10:15 AM
ROFL yep thats what you do when your child is missing, go out and nick one yourselves:eek: Us English are known for it :crazy: Geez those people really need to get out more :D :D :D

What in the world are you talking about daffodil?

gord
01-22-2008, 10:27 AM
What in the world are you talking about daffodil?


a bit of English Venacular

to go out and nick one - is to steal / take what isnt yours


Daffodil is just talking about the internet / blog rumours that are beginning to start up saying that the spanish girl dissapearance was set up the mccaans themselves

colomom
01-22-2008, 10:48 AM
a bit of English Venacular

to go out and nick one - is to steal / take what isnt yours


Daffodil is just talking about the internet / blog rumours that are beginning to start up saying that the spanish girl dissapearance was set up the mccaans themselves

I know what "nick" means gord.

Please let daffodil respond to this question.

Thanks.

daffodil
01-22-2008, 10:51 AM
What in the world are you talking about daffodil?

What gord said.

Claycat
01-22-2008, 11:07 AM
Y'all are beginning to sound like sharks at a feeding frenzy.

colomom
01-22-2008, 11:15 AM
What gord said.

Wow, completely misunderstood your post Daffodil. When you wrote "thats what you do when your child is missing, go out and nick one yourselves" it sounded like you were saying that the McCanns kidnapped Mari Luz.

Thank you for the "reply".

colomom
01-22-2008, 11:17 AM
Y'all are beginning to sound like sharks at a feeding frenzy.

Man, I wish you guys would elaborate a bit on your posts. I cannot read minds and it makes it difficult to respond.

What are you talking about Claycat?

daffodil
01-22-2008, 11:20 AM
Wow, completely misunderstood your post Daffodil. When you wrote "thats what you do when your child is missing, go out and nick one yourselves" it sounded like you were saying that the McCanns kidnapped Mari Luz.

Thank you for the "reply".

LOL just my daft sense of humour I'm afraid :crazy: :D

colomom
01-22-2008, 11:23 AM
http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=38023

With regards to the "rumors" about the involvement of those that work for the McCann camp, which by the way the McCanns themselves may be completely clueless about, Mickey1 raises some interesting questions about the Mari Luz kidnapping (see link above).

"It has been one week...everything appears normal...not like a child has been abducted.....
The question is where has the money come from?...Spaniards would not send money to gypsies....they are not liked...Gypsies keep to themselves they are a clan....and do not like the police....

How have they got together so quickly money for badges , printed T Shirts and glossy posters? "

And RevEvans over on the Proboards site (http://helpmadeleine.proboards79.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1200926355&page=13 post #188) writes:

"But what a Parody,A Bogus Charity,trademarked and once they get enough of others to let them use there kids pictures they can apply for Charity Status."

I wonder if that is true about the charity status.

Texana
01-22-2008, 01:17 PM
Sadly, many people take advantage of true crime for their own advantage.

I wouldn't be surprised if that was the situation here. Remember the woman who fabricated that her child had cancer, just to collect money?

Claycat
01-22-2008, 05:20 PM
Man, I wish you guys would elaborate a bit on your posts. I cannot read minds and it makes it difficult to respond.

What are you talking about Claycat?

I guess I mean that the thread has turned into a bash the McCanns thread rather than a Madeleine McCann thread. She is still out there somewhere! Her parents were negligent, but they will always have to live with that! Many of the things being printed are incorrect about what is going on in their lives. The Portuguese police made a lot of mistakes and wasted a lot of time trying to crucify the parents. The main objective is still Madeleine!

:confused:

Texana
01-22-2008, 05:56 PM
I guess I mean that the thread has turned into a bash the McCanns thread rather than a Madeleine McCann thread. She is still out there somewhere! Her parents were negligent, but they will always have to live with that! Many of the things being printed are incorrect about what is going on in their lives. The Portuguese police made a lot of mistakes and wasted a lot of time trying to crucify the parents. The main objective is still Madeleine!

:confused:


Claycat, we have been through this discussion many, many times. Check the past threads.

Just because some believe that the McCanns' negligence is a) still a critical point or b) that there may be another truth besides abduction does not mean that Madeleine is not the main objective. The truth is what matters.

Claycat
01-22-2008, 06:22 PM
There are many threads in this forum. I haven't had a chance to read them all.

I think I have come to the wrong place!

colomom
01-22-2008, 06:41 PM
I guess I mean that the thread has turned into a bash the McCanns thread rather than a Madeleine McCann thread. She is still out there somewhere! Her parents were negligent, but they will always have to live with that! Many of the things being printed are incorrect about what is going on in their lives. The Portuguese police made a lot of mistakes and wasted a lot of time trying to crucify the parents. The main objective is still Madeleine!

:confused:

Whoa, those are some serious declarations!

How do you know "she is still out there somewhere"?
How do you know about "what is going on in their lives"?
What "mistakes have the Portuguese Police made?"
How have "they tried to crucify her parents?"

One of the things I have found on this board is that most posters are willing to back up their assertions with links to published information or, at least, with logical, thoughtful, considerate theory. We refrain from calling each other names even if we completely disagree with one another.

I can assure you that the forums that discuss this case are usually on one side of the fence or the other. As Texana said, we have defended our right to post our opinion many, many times. I am sure that if the "tone" of this forum does not suit your taste, you can find one that will be more in line with your core beliefs.

colomom
01-22-2008, 06:50 PM
Wow. Could this be true?

From Anorak Comments today:

124
David Pleads With The Moderator Says:

January 22nd, 2008 at 10:18 am
What the police are in effect suggesting is that they can show first what happened, then who did what and when to hide the discovery, why they did this, how this was done, where the evidence was removed to temporarily (a neighbouring apartment), that during the following days the same accessories then placed the evidence outside the perimeter of the ongoing searches (they know where), that the temporary disposal site was deemed insecure by the lead party and a more secure and destructive location identified, that weeks later there was a difficulty in retrieving the evidence for permanent relocation, that this required a phone call from the UK to accomplish, that a hire car rented for various purposes was used to transport the evidence for the last time, and so - hey presto! - a perfect narrative backed up by a chain of evidence.

No real doubt therefore remains about how the whole thing tied together, so the first question is what will be the response at reinterview and will the inevitability of arrest and sway parties into bargaining for lesser charges? The process either way switches back to Portugal, warrants will almost definitely be sought, and at least three parties will be arrested and charged as a result.

The second question is what will the charges be? And this depends on attitudes at reinterview. One party at least is likely inescapably facing very serious charges and has no incentive to change story. Although seriously implicated in what the police see as a plot to deceive, the two people likely to be shown as accessories are the means to effectively prosecute the third, so their decisions when faced with evidence of their own involvement are pivotal.

The case is - in legal terms - solved.

Texana
01-22-2008, 06:57 PM
There are many threads in this forum. I haven't had a chance to read them all.

I think I have come to the wrong place!

Not necessarily. But this case has strong feelings, and you cannot take anything personally or make personal assumptions about other people's motivations.

It is always good to remember that everyone here, is here, because they care about what happened to a little girl named Madeleine.

Think of this as a volleyball game or tennis match rather than an all one way or the other kind of place, and you will be just fine and welcome. I don't mind having my conclusions/thoughts/attitudes challenged, because the unexamined life is not worth living.

Barnaby
01-22-2008, 07:28 PM
Wow. Could this be true?

From Anorak Comments today:

124
David Pleads With The Moderator Says:

January 22nd, 2008 at 10:18 am
What the police are in effect suggesting is that they can show first what happened, then who did what and when to hide the discovery, why they did this, how this was done, where the evidence was removed to temporarily (a neighbouring apartment), that during the following days the same accessories then placed the evidence outside the perimeter of the ongoing searches (they know where), that the temporary disposal site was deemed insecure by the lead party and a more secure and destructive location identified, that weeks later there was a difficulty in retrieving the evidence for permanent relocation, that this required a phone call from the UK to accomplish, that a hire car rented for various purposes was used to transport the evidence for the last time, and so - hey presto! - a perfect narrative backed up by a chain of evidence.

No real doubt therefore remains about how the whole thing tied together, so the first question is what will be the response at reinterview and will the inevitability of arrest and sway parties into bargaining for lesser charges? The process either way switches back to Portugal, warrants will almost definitely be sought, and at least three parties will be arrested and charged as a result.

The second question is what will the charges be? And this depends on attitudes at reinterview. One party at least is likely inescapably facing very serious charges and has no incentive to change story. Although seriously implicated in what the police see as a plot to deceive, the two people likely to be shown as accessories are the means to effectively prosecute the third, so their decisions when faced with evidence of their own involvement are pivotal.

The case is - in legal terms - solved.

WOW!! If this is true!!

Salem
01-22-2008, 07:50 PM
Wow is right! I hope it is true! Not because I want the McCanns to be guilty (I would prefer that they weren't) but because I do want justice and peace for Maddie.

Salem

Texana
01-22-2008, 08:16 PM
WOW!! If this is true!!

Wow! Is right. And typically, the way any case with multiple parties plays out. Play Party A against Party B--throw an offer of leniency in--and see who caves first.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-22-2008, 08:40 PM
Wow! Is right. And typically, the way any case with multiple parties plays out. Play Party A against Party B--throw an offer of leniency in--and see who caves first.

:eek: Very interesting. I hope there will be justice for Madeleine soon. I have always had a feeling that there was an eye witness, that never made themselves known except to the PLE. I think someone...who has never been mentioned saw something and reported it to PLE. In my neighborhood, there are a few little old ladies that know EVERYTHING, and are always 100% correct in their gossip...They drive me NUTS!

Texana
01-22-2008, 08:43 PM
All the PLE needs is one tiny incontrovertible fact to show any of the parties that one reported fact is a lie or untrue.

Claycat
01-22-2008, 08:46 PM
Colomom,

I know "she is still out there somewhere," because she is not with her parents, and they haven't found her. So, since her body has not been found and she has not been found, she is still out there somewhere.

How do YOU know about "what is going on in their lives"? Most of us really don't know anything other than what the media prints.

What "mistakes have the Portuguese police made"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/11/wmaddy511.xml

If that link isn't enough, I'm sure I can fetch you some more!

Okay, maybe crucify was a strong word, but it seems like more time was spent trying to prove the McCanns did it than to find out who else might have. Unfortunately, there is a strong desire among many police communities to solve a crime quickly, even if it may not be the right suspect! You have to know that, if you are on a sleuth forum!

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-22-2008, 09:04 PM
Colomom,

I know "she is still out there somewhere," because she is not with her parents, and they haven't found her. So, since her body has not been found and she has not been found, she is still out there somewhere.

How do YOU know about "what is going on in their lives"? Most of us really don't know anything other than what the media prints.

What "mistakes have the Portuguese police made"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/11/wmaddy511.xml

If that link isn't enough, I'm sure I can fetch you some more!

Okay, maybe crucify was a strong word, but it seems like more time was spent trying to prove the McCanns did it than to find out who else might have. Unfortunately, there is a strong desire among many police communities to solve a crime quickly, even if it may not be the right suspect! You have to know that, if you are on a sleuth forum!

Oh, Kitty, Kitty, Kitty. You believe everything you read that slams the PLE? (But nothing that points at the McCanns). Looks like we are all in the same boat with different paddles.

Texana
01-22-2008, 09:07 PM
Oh, Kitty, Kitty, Kitty. You believe everything you read that slams the PLE? (But nothing that points at the McCanns). Looks like we are all in the same boat with different paddles.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Claycat
01-22-2008, 09:09 PM
Oh, Kitty, Kitty, Kitty. You believe everything you read that slams the PLE? (But nothing that points at the McCanns). Looks like we are all in the same boat with different paddles.

Oh, Catty, Catty, Catty! I guess we are!

colomom
01-22-2008, 09:21 PM
Colomom,

I know "she is still out there somewhere," because she is not with her parents, and they haven't found her. So, since her body has not been found and she has not been found, she is still out there somewhere.

Thank you for clarifying your post.

Don't know if you are aware but, there are suggestions that the PJ have found her body....it's possible. Of course that still means she is out there....maybe in a PJ controlled morgue.

How do YOU know about "what is going on in their lives"? Most of us really don't know anything other than what the media prints.

I don't know and never have said I know and frankly, don't care. All I care about is justice for Maddie.

What "mistakes have the Portuguese police made"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/11/wmaddy511.xml

If that link isn't enough, I'm sure I can fetch you some more!

No, that will be fine, I understand where you are coming from now.

That is opinion and that's fine. I disagree and I could go into a really lengthy explanation about how I think that the McCanns themselves are responsible for many of the so-called mistakes the PJ made. But, I'm burnt, I have posted my thoughts on that many, many, many times.

Okay, maybe crucify was a strong word, but it seems like more time was spent trying to prove the McCanns did it than to find out who else might have. Unfortunately, there is a strong desire among many police communities to solve a crime quickly, even if it may not be the right suspect! You have to know that, if you are on a sleuth forum!

You don't know me, obviously. If you had been around from the start you would know that this is the very first time I have ever been involved with a forum such as this and I am still learning. I know a little about police procedure but I am not a pro, not by a long shot. I have read EXTENSIVELY about this case. I have spent up to 14 hours a day, 7 days a week, researching, reading, searching and trying to use logic to figure out what we all want to know. What happened to Maddie? I would bet I know alot more about the PJ than most people.

If the PJ wanted to "solve the crime quickly" why did they not just pin it all on Robert Murat (not the right suspect)? Or why did they not just say there was not enough evidence to go forward and shelve the entire case?

PLUS...are you aware that the British police have been involved in this case from the very beginning? It was their investigators that advised the PJ on what to do to put the case together? It was their dogs that were brought in and their forensics lab that tested the samples collected by the PJ.

I think the PJ have very specific evidence that we know nothing about (yet) that makes it very obvious to them that the focus needs to be on the McCanns. Why waste more time and money than they already have, trying to prove the innocence of the people they feel confident are the prime suspects. That would not be logical.

Anyway, I could go on and on but, I have been doing this for 8 months and I am tired of defending my beliefs and justifying my opinions.

Suffice it to say....only time will tell.

Claycat
01-22-2008, 09:26 PM
Colomom, you are the one who challenged what I said, point by point! Why are you feeling so defensive?

colomom
01-22-2008, 09:36 PM
Colomom, you are the one who challenged what I said, point by point! Why are you feeling so defensive?

Oh, I don't know, maybe because this whole exchange started with being referred to as a "shark at a feeding frenzy".

It is what it is. :cool:

Salem
01-22-2008, 09:39 PM
Claycat - I shortened your post a tad to save space, hope you don't mind.
Colomom,

What "mistakes have the Portuguese police made"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/11/wmaddy511.xml

If that link isn't enough, I'm sure I can fetch you some more!


This really goes under the "sketch" thread, but I thought it was quite interesting to find this little tidbit in the article that was quoted:

~snip~
There were complaints about the length of time it took to put up posters of Madeleine, while an online appeal was only established after international pressure.


In the week after the four-year-old went missing, staff at local hotels, restaurants and bars were shown different sketches of suspects, ranging from a tanned man in his thirties, to a bald suspect, to a silhouette. ~end snip~

Me thinks the PJ has already taken a look for the 'swarthy' suspect.:rolleyes:

Salem

Claycat
01-22-2008, 10:12 PM
Colomom, you are the one who challenged what I said, point by point! Why are you feeling so defensive?

Oh, I don't know, maybe because this whole exchange started with being referred to as a "shark at a feeding frenzy".

It is what it is. :cool:

I said "Y'all". I wasn't referring to a specific person.

Yup! It is what it is! We are in definite agreement on that!

Claycat
01-22-2008, 10:14 PM
Claycat - I shortened your post a tad to save space, hope you don't mind.


This really goes under the "sketch" thread, but I thought it was quite interesting to find this little tidbit in the article that was quoted:

~snip~
There were complaints about the length of time it took to put up posters of Madeleine, while an online appeal was only established after international pressure.


In the week after the four-year-old went missing, staff at local hotels, restaurants and bars were shown different sketches of suspects, ranging from a tanned man in his thirties, to a bald suspect, to a silhouette. ~end snip~

Me thinks the PJ has already taken a look for the 'swarthy' suspect.:rolleyes:

Salem

Yes, it does look like that, Salem. Thanks for pointing that out!

Texana
01-22-2008, 11:14 PM
Jane Tanner has reportedly said that the person she saw that night was Robert Murat.

The new sketch doesn't look anything like Robert Murat, but Jane Tanner reportedly says that is the man she saw as well.

Right? Reportedly, of course.

Claycat
01-22-2008, 11:27 PM
Jane Tanner has reportedly said that the person she saw that night was Robert Murat.

The new sketch doesn't look anything like Robert Murat, but Jane Tanner reportedly says that is the man she saw as well.

Right? Reportedly, of course.


I found a link.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=509285&in_page_id=1770

Shazza
01-23-2008, 12:05 AM
I found a link.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=509285&in_page_id=1770

I read your quote before you edited it, and you asked for the link, you found it, as Im sure you could also find the links to some other of your posts without other posters having to repeat themselves or waste more time finding links that back up their posts. I have followed this case from the beginning but not posted much of late as there really has been no new news for quite some time.

Please read all the threads, posts, links etc.

This is getting so petty, everyones opinion is just that their opinion, so there are no links. But Im sure if you read everything your questions will be answered as your questions have been asked numerous times.

Claycat
01-23-2008, 12:34 AM
I read your quote before you edited it, and you asked for the link, you found it, as Im sure you could also find the links to some other of your posts without other posters having to repeat themselves or waste more time finding links that back up their posts. I have followed this case from the beginning but not posted much of late as there really has been no new news for quite some time.

Please read all the threads, posts, links etc.

This is getting so petty, everyones opinion is just that their opinion, so there are no links. But Im sure if you read everything your questions will be answered as your questions have been asked numerous times.


Yes, it is getting petty! However, I was asked to back up everything I posted, so I was getting the idea that it was standard operating procedure.

Colomom said, "One of the things I have found on this board is that most posters are willing to back up their assertions with links to published information or, at least, with logical, thoughtful, considerate theory."

So, are we allowed to have opinions or not?


"Please read all the threads, posts, links, etc." Is everyone who first comes to this forum required to read the thousands of posts?

I have been keeping up with the McCann case for months, too! I have read articles all over the web and visited many forums as well. I have as much information as any of you have.

scandi
01-23-2008, 01:11 AM
1) Do you have a link re the lawyers called within 48 hours? I dont recall that TIA
2) I dont believe they did the set up of the website themselves did they? I dont see anything sinister in it anyway.
3) The UK gov did not protect them from investigation.
4) Neither of the McCanns contacted the media personally.
5) The world knew they had left the children alone so why would they mention it? I fail to see what is wrong with using what contacts you may have to help find your child and keep her in the headlines.
6) Whilst not what everyone would do it doesnt make them killers.
7) Do you have the link for them asking for the questions in advance because if that is true why didnt they have answers to them all? Why were some unanswered?

You emailed the Chief of Police to ask him why the police werent looking for Madeleine?:eek:


Hi Daffidil,

You might want to sit down with your beautiful crown among your crowd, your host of golden daffodils. LOL Your nik has great memories for me learning Wadsworth. :) I come unprepared for links but have studied this case day and night it seems with a passion for 8 1/'2 months.

A couple of these questions I might know the answers to:

I also heard that 2 lawyers arrived from England within two days from when she was taken. IMO these lawyers were not criminal defense types, but rather financial and document people, for within 10 days of Madeleine's disappearance the Fund was established, and by the 12th day it was a done deal and in place. Team McCann was on it's way take over the finding of Madeleine.

Those involved were basically family except for some dear friends and acquaintances, one of which was the young pluck of a teen who established and has run the website all of this time. He was under the tutiledge of Auntie Phil who had him in class at school.

The UK Governnent wrapped them in protection from the night she went missing, when one high up in the ranks was interrupted at a cocktail party got a call that a young 3 year old British girl had been abducted in Portugal. The protectorates were immediately involved as Gordon Brown and Clarence to a commenting Tony Blair put up a staunch wall for this abduction to give it the highest regard. Next we know that Gerry is calling Brown on his tele on a routine basis and that although the PJ on scene that night saw no evidence of abduction, that is what the PJ were bound to investigate at the lead from the British LE who were immediately called into the case and followed their superiors lead from the high portals of the government.

Carlos Anjos had an interview in which he made a statement that the very first call the parents made was by Kate to SKY news, even before the police were called to the scene. It is verifiable that the call went to the local Algarve correspondant.

The GNR were called to the scene at 10:40pm, 40 min after she was discovered gone. This call to SKY was made soon after the GR arroved. Two members of the GR commented in an article that Kate was on the phone continually to the media. The PJ were then called by the GNR,who thought a crime had been committed {which is their regulations,which was logged into the PJ station at 11:50pm. They arrived around midnight.

Anjos went on to say that it was 1 1/2 hours after the PJ arrived that SKY News was on the scene in PDL. In person, taking everything in and writing their script for a 6:30am broadcast that would wake up the world to Madeleine's plight.

I do agree with you Daffodil, but after what they had done in leaving their 3 children alone, which was night after night BTW and not just on the 3rd, if they saw the error of their ways the normal thing expected by the public would be to have a presser and make an apology. To tell the truth, express their sorrow at their mistake and beg for the public to please help them by searching for her everywhere, in barns, bldgs, under bridges, etc.

They didn't do this. 5 days later they did have a presser, but the problem is the world did not see them as sincerely distraught, and it was quite a lame statement made anyway. Hold that up to the way all the other parents have reacted where there wasn't even any negligence and you would wonder what is up with these people. They seem cold, and that stayed in the back of minds all this time.

I agree with you too that just because they didn't act like sincere grieving parents like people expected them to, it doesn't make them killers. People all over the world gave money to help fine Madeleine. They thought of her plight

But what I have always thought Daffodil, is that what if these 2 parents saw or caused her death and failed to call emergency to get her any help that could have possibly save her life? Would you respect them and hold them above fault in regards to their little wisp of a girl, Madeleine?

To think that her own parents could in silence and with a quick plan and a pact, spirit her away against the law of the land and mankind, to hide her and then have the gaul to dare the police to find her to prove she had died.

Tonight we know the PJ know when and how she was taken from the apt and where she was kept for a few days. It broke my heart to hear that as I wanted her to be alive. And learning that the bodily fluids and blood in the Scenic were hers, post mortem, Eddie alerting to her death scent, Gerry borrowing Russell's car on the night of the 3rd and a phone call he made sitting now on Rebelo's desk. It is all coming together now with facts that have been the subject of great and tedious investigation.

I apologize for seeming a bit stiff in writing to you. In the back of my brain I have all these things recently confirmed about Madeleine and we are on the eve of the interrogations of the T7 or some of them. Clarrie says they now have a request from Eurojust for interviews. I think the parents will be charged in the due process of time. Madeleine will get justice.

But she will never run and play again here with us. For that I am angry at those who cared about her less, and why she got no help from her protectors when she was helpless and needed it the most. So sad. xoxoxo

ThoughtFox
01-23-2008, 02:40 AM
Oh, I don't know, maybe because this whole exchange started with being referred to as a "shark at a feeding frenzy".

It is what it is. :cool:

Indeed, that might make anyone defensive. :crazy: :)

Claycat: If you've been around, you know that we've all seen the articles about Jane Tanner and Egg-Head Man or GeorgeHarrison/Charles Bronson Man. Sometimes he's a Brit dressed in fancy clothes, and the next week he's a con man in rags.

What does that prove? Only that Jane Tanner is changing her story. That's all it means to me. :rolleyes:

How does that help to find Maddie? So far it hasn't at all. Why doesn't Jane Tanner got back to Algarve and walk the streets to find this guy, if she is so sure of what he looks like? :waitasec:

gord
01-23-2008, 06:55 AM
Indeed, that might make anyone defensive. :crazy: :)

Claycat: If you've been around, you know that we've all seen the articles about Jane Tanner and Egg-Head Man or GeorgeHarrison/Charles Bronson Man. Sometimes he's a Brit dressed in fancy clothes, and the next week he's a con man in rags.

What does that prove? Only that Jane Tanner is changing her story. That's all it means to me. :rolleyes:

How does that help to find Maddie? So far it hasn't at all. Why doesn't Jane Tanner got back to Algarve and walk the streets to find this guy, if she is so sure of what he looks like? :waitasec:

Jane Tanner made her statement to the police in May and then said nothing in public until an interview months later . She has been very consistant in saying she saw a man carrying a child - at the time . As far as I know this man has never been traced - if it were a holday maker or a local . I have never seen a report that he has been ruled out . Why do you say she keeps on changing her story . To me she has consistently repeated she saw a man with a child She saw something that could be vital. She didint get a close look at his face and said so ...... hence all the original sketches had no face

3 other witnesses reported seeing someone in the vicinity that didnt look correct - the healtth worker cooper and her husband and the nannies . I think there is possibly one other person as well I have seen a report on . That is 3 independent witnesses - did they all make it up ? . Even if this person is nothing more than a homless tramp ......it should be checked out . To do nothing would be nelgligent .

I have seen Tanner interviwed and she has clearly stated on film that she is willing to go back too Portugal anytime to help , repeat her statement . If I was the PJ I would take her uo on it .

do you think all these people are lying - should we just dismiss them ?

ThoughtFox
01-23-2008, 08:23 AM
gord: Nothing should be ruled out, however . . .

Just because Jane Tanner saw someone carrying a child does not mean that child was Maddie. And originally, what she said she saw was someone carrying a "bundle of clothes." That's why we called him "Bundleman."

Then she has changed her story for the TV show Panorama, saying the child had on "pinky" pajamas, though she saw only the legs. The bottoms of Maddie's pj's were white, not pink.

She has always said she didn't see his face, but now she thinks he looks like the details in the latest drawing. That is a major contradiction.

The first good drawing released by the McCann Team and Metodo, which was never done until October of last year, did not resemble this latest drawing, and I'm sure you know that. Jane Tanner told them to leave the face blank because she didn't see it, but they drew Maddie's pajamas in detail, even though she was some distance away from him. :rolleyes:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id30.html

There are a number of reasons why Jane Tanner's account of the 'abductor' raise concern:

His height has been inconsistent, ranging at various times from 5ft 6in to 5ft 11in. On Panorama she describes that 'He was about probably 5ft 8in tall, he was taller than me but not 6ft and so between those two'. In one sentence he appears to have grown 2 inches, from 5ft 8in to 5ft 10in (somewhere between the two of 5ft 8in and 6ft).

His hair has gone from 'hair that was short on top' to 'quite a lot of dark, reasonably-long-to-the-neck hair'.

His build has gone from 'medium' to 'slim', although this must have been difficult to ascertain as Tanner describes the man wearing 'quite a lot of clothes' and 'a big heavy jacket'.

He was originally stated to be 'carrying a child or an object that could have been taken as a child' and now Tanner states that 'I could tell it was a child, and I could see the feet and... feet and the bottom of the pyjamas', she continues 'the pyjamas had a pinky aspect to them'.

His skin has gone from 'white' to 'swarthy' although she admits to being 'a reasonable distance away' from him and that 'He had his face turned away from me, sort of sideways and it was very dark. I just didn’t see it properly, I wish to God I had'.


So to answer your question, gord - yes, I think she is lying and changing her story. Either that, or she is crazy. Either that or she is covering up for someone, or for herself, since she left her own child vomiting in her room that night.

Bandini
01-23-2008, 08:56 AM
So far, IN MY OPINION, the evidence points to the McCanns: the Maddie DNA in the Scenic, the cadaver scent on Kate and in the apartment, the missing or "stolen" tennis bag and stroller, not to mention their detached and rigid behavior. If I'm not mistaken (without going back through ALL of the posts since day one), the sketches were released AFTER all this information was made public, which IN MY OPINION, was the result of someone rushing to the defense of the McCanns. If this suspicious man was real and truly seen in that time frame, presumably carrying a CHILD, why did it take WEEKS for someone to remember that?

If there was a rapist, murderer, or KIDNAPPER terrorizing your neighborhood would you leave your windows and doors unlocked, walk alone in the wee hours of the night, or leave your children unattended? Probably not.

Put your emotions aside, stand back and look at what is known.

colomom
01-23-2008, 09:05 AM
BIG NEWS PEEPS!!!

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/colomom/mirror-1.jpg

Gotta fly this morning, will be back later.

Barnaby
01-23-2008, 09:27 AM
^^^^^

I never posted on the Mirror Forums but always read the relevant posts there. This is a huge step!! Wonder why now? The "silly" posters have been there all along!

ThoughtFox
01-23-2008, 09:31 AM
I guess this might mean an influx of new people here?

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-23-2008, 02:36 PM
I guess this might mean an influx of new people here?


Hold on to your hats, (and your tongues), it's going to get bad. Don't fall into the trap folks. Use the ignore button, or have a stiff drink, anything but fall into the trap of the mirror forum groupies.:eek: :silenced: :hand:

They'll eat us alive, (and get our forum locked forever), if we are not good! :croc:

Barnaby
01-23-2008, 04:14 PM
^^^^^^

God I hope not!!

Texana
01-23-2008, 04:32 PM
Hold on to your hats, (and your tongues), it's going to get bad. Don't fall into the trap folks. Use the ignore button, or have a stiff drink, anything but fall into the trap of the mirror forum groupies.:eek: :silenced: :hand:

They'll eat us alive, (and get out forum locked forever), if we are not good! :croc:

Amen to that, sister.

I wonder if there were threats of legal action made to the Mirror forum from certain involved or mentioned parties.

colomom
01-23-2008, 05:07 PM
http://www.dreamindemon.com/2008/01/23/wendy-chenoweth-needs-a-babysitter/

I posted over there:

I KNEW some ditz was going to read about Madeleine McCann and say….”if Kate McCann can do it, why can’t I?”

….dumbchit

Barnaby
01-23-2008, 06:10 PM
http://www.dreamindemon.com/2008/01/23/wendy-chenoweth-needs-a-babysitter/

I posted over there:

I KNEW some ditz was going to read about Madeleine McCann and say….”if Kate McCann can do it, why can’t I?”

….dumbchit

Well it looks like at least someone is taking action over that dumb woman! At least her kids were not hurt, thank God! Kate McCanns child was & she gets away scott free! 'doesn't seem right somehow!

daffodil
01-23-2008, 07:25 PM
Well it looks like at least someone is taking action over that dumb woman! At least her kids were not hurt, thank God! Kate McCanns child was & she gets away scott free! 'doesn't seem right somehow!

Scot free?????????????? You dont think she grieves for the loss of her child??? :waitasec:

SleuthMom
01-23-2008, 07:44 PM
You dont think she grieves for the loss of her child???

Does it really matter???? Madeleine STILL missing!!!!! She is the one who probably went through hell and God knows what kind of abuse at the tender age of 3! Whether Kate grieves or no grieves, what's the point????

Texana
01-23-2008, 07:58 PM
http://www.dreamindemon.com/2008/01/23/wendy-chenoweth-needs-a-babysitter/

I posted over there:

I KNEW some ditz was going to read about Madeleine McCann and say….”if Kate McCann can do it, why can’t I?”

….dumbchit

She's not Kingwood area (which is quite affluent) she's Huffman--which is much more rural,chances are she lives in a trailer.

She's from a very different socioeconomic class than the McCanns. Sadly, she probably doesn't know very much, if anything, about the McCanns.

Which is interesting, if you want to draw conclusions about what the McCanns did.

CourtScribe
01-23-2008, 08:48 PM
The moderators have repeated frequently "posters need to play nice" with each other; no name-calling, no venom spitted at McCann's, no arguments with co-posters.
Still, it is hard to believe the website's given reason for extinguishing this, the most prolific Madeleine UK forum!
I am questioning the UK government/Clarence Mitchell's overarching clamps on any negative speculation of the McCann's. Jacqui Smith, UK government, who has stopped the PJ questioning again the parents and Tapas7, has especially come under much scrutiny for her actions. Her email address was posted in order to query her motivation and complain to her of UK official involvement at all in these suspects' criminal proceedings.
What does everyone think?
kathleen

Salem
01-23-2008, 09:00 PM
How is it known that Jacqui Smith has stopped the PJ's reinterviewing?

I'm thinking maybe the forum was shut down because of the stuff that was posted about the PJ having the case "sewn up." Maybe even the PJ requested it because they didn't want that information leaked.

I believe Colomom posted the information here, yesterday or the day before, but honestly, I did not look to what the date was on the original "mirror" post.

I think the UK government needs to stay out of things, but I do support the assistance offered by the UK LE and forensic team.

Salem

ThoughtFox
01-23-2008, 11:54 PM
I'm thinking that if these folks come here, I hope they have their facts straight, and that's really all that matters to me. I hope no one comes here just to argue or play mind games, or act childishly.

And thankfully, I don't think the UK Government can close down Websleuths. :woohoo:

Salem
01-24-2008, 01:23 AM
Scot free?????????????? You dont think she grieves for the loss of her child??? :waitasec:

I know this question was not directed at me but....... Do I (me, myself) think she grieves the loss of her child? Quite frankly, I don't know what to think. I hope she does, I want her too, I want to think that Maddie was loved and is truely missed. However, I have some grave concerns.... I don't think a parent that refuses to be 100% honest with the investigating agency is seriously looking for their child; I don't think a parent that refuses to answer questions put forth by the investigating agency is truely looking for their child; I don't think a parent that charges for posters is truely seeking the location of their missing child; I don't think a parent that has to hire a "spokesperson" to run interference is truely being honest and looking for their missing child; I don't think a parent that leaves the area the child went missing from without having first made sure the investigating agency had the most accurate and honest information available is truely looking for their missing child.

At this point - I think both Gerry and Kate are more interested in having the media noise die down so that they can get on with their lives then they are in finding Maddie. I believe when the time comes we will see a great legal fight to keep the McCann's from going back to Portugal.

I don't begrudge them jogging or even spending money on their mortgage, however given all the money they received and the fact that it is FREE to download a picture, I definitely begrudge them the 10 cents for the posters. I begrudge them "Maddie's" website which appears to be more about making money than finding their daughter and I begrudge and judge them on their failure to be 100% honest with LE so that LE's best efforts could be put forward to find Maddie. If the McCanns were not involved and Maddie was truely abducted, I can see no evidence or media leaks that indicate the McCanns put their best efforts forward to find their daughter. None, nada, zip. So, no I don't really think they are missing and/or grieving for Maddie. Actions speak louder than words and so far, the McCanns haven't been very good with their words and their lack of action is screaming at me. And I find all of this very, very sad for Maddie.

Salem

ThoughtFox
01-24-2008, 01:40 AM
Strange new story about a Murat look-alike! :eek: A guy who worked at the Ocean Club there really did look like Murat. His name is Symington - I bet we hear that name again, but why hasn't this likeness been noticed before?

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/32542/Lookalike-will-put-No-1-suspect-Murat-in-Clear-

There is no suggestion that Mr Symington had anything to do with the tragedy. He insisted that he was at home with his family six miles away when Madeleine vanished.

He said last night: “I had been away in England for 10 days and came back the day before Madeleine went missing. I was here on the day, and for a few days following, but then I left again for a week.

“I categorically wasn’t around on the night she vanished. I left Praia da Luz at close of business at 6pm to go home. It couldn’t have been me. The first I was aware of the story was when I arrived at work the next day.”

Bandini
01-24-2008, 06:46 AM
I know this question was not directed at me but....... Do I (me, myself) think she grieves the loss of her child? Quite frankly, I don't know what to think. I hope she does, I want her too, I want to think that Maddie was loved and is truely missed. However, I have some grave concerns.... I don't think a parent that refuses to be 100% honest with the investigating agency is seriously looking for their child; I don't think a parent that refuses to answer questions put forth by the investigating agency is truely looking for their child; I don't think a parent that charges for posters is truely seeking the location of their missing child; I don't think a parent that has to hire a "spokesperson" to run interference is truely being honest and looking for their missing child; I don't think a parent that leaves the area the child went missing from without having first made sure the investigating agency had the most accurate and honest information available is truely looking for their missing child.

At this point - I think both Gerry and Kate are more interested in having the media noise die down so that they can get on with their lives then they are in finding Maddie. I believe when the time comes we will see a great legal fight to keep the McCann's from going back to Portugal.

I don't begrudge them jogging or even spending money on their mortgage, however given all the money they received and the fact that it is FREE to download a picture, I definitely begrudge them the 10 cents for the posters. I begrudge them "Maddie's" website which appears to be more about making money than finding their daughter and I begrudge and judge them on their failure to be 100% honest with LE so that LE's best efforts could be put forward to find Maddie. If the McCanns were not involved and Maddie was truely abducted, I can see no evidence or media leaks that indicate the McCanns put their best efforts forward to find their daughter. None, nada, zip. So, no I don't really think they are missing and/or grieving for Maddie. Actions speak louder than words and so far, the McCanns haven't been very good with their words and their lack of action is screaming at me. And I find all of this very, very sad for Maddie.

Salem

Excellent post, Salem

ceeaura
01-24-2008, 07:44 AM
Strange new story about a Murat look-alike! :eek: A guy who worked at the Ocean Club there really did look like Murat. His name is Symington - I bet we hear that name again, but why hasn't this likeness been noticed before?

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/32542/Lookalike-will-put-No-1-suspect-Murat-in-Clear-


So Symington is on the left and Murat is on the right?

Wow.I can't believe it was not noticed before!

Barnaby
01-24-2008, 08:15 AM
Scot free?????????????? You dont think she grieves for the loss of her child??? :waitasec:
Never saw any sign of it!

Salem's post #144 says it all!

Barnaby
01-24-2008, 08:20 AM
I know this question was not directed at me but....... Do I (me, myself) think she grieves the loss of her child? Quite frankly, I don't know what to think. I hope she does, I want her too, I want to think that Maddie was loved and is truely missed. However, I have some grave concerns.... I don't think a parent that refuses to be 100% honest with the investigating agency is seriously looking for their child; I don't think a parent that refuses to answer questions put forth by the investigating agency is truely looking for their child; I don't think a parent that charges for posters is truely seeking the location of their missing child; I don't think a parent that has to hire a "spokesperson" to run interference is truely being honest and looking for their missing child; I don't think a parent that leaves the area the child went missing from without having first made sure the investigating agency had the most accurate and honest information available is truely looking for their missing child.

At this point - I think both Gerry and Kate are more interested in having the media noise die down so that they can get on with their lives then they are in finding Maddie. I believe when the time comes we will see a great legal fight to keep the McCann's from going back to Portugal.

I don't begrudge them jogging or even spending money on their mortgage, however given all the money they received and the fact that it is FREE to download a picture, I definitely begrudge them the 10 cents for the posters. I begrudge them "Maddie's" website which appears to be more about making money than finding their daughter and I begrudge and judge them on their failure to be 100% honest with LE so that LE's best efforts could be put forward to find Maddie. If the McCanns were not involved and Maddie was truely abducted, I can see no evidence or media leaks that indicate the McCanns put their best efforts forward to find their daughter. None, nada, zip. So, no I don't really think they are missing and/or grieving for Maddie. Actions speak louder than words and so far, the McCanns haven't been very good with their words and their lack of action is screaming at me. And I find all of this very, very sad for Maddie.

Salem

Excellent post Salem, ITA!!

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-24-2008, 09:21 AM
Strange new story about a Murat look-alike! :eek: A guy who worked at the Ocean Club there really did look like Murat. His name is Symington - I bet we hear that name again, but why hasn't this likeness been noticed before?

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/32542/Lookalike-will-put-No-1-suspect-Murat-in-Clear-


Hummm....supposedly Nanny P said she saw Murat talking with "creepy man". Maybe it was this guy, Symington who was talking to the pig farmer. I mentioned this on the sketch thread, I really do know a few pig farmers...they are known to work odd jobs...painting, construction.. etc. Maybe he was doing work for this guy....(thus, Claycats vision of money exchanging hands).:waitasec:

Rino
01-24-2008, 09:27 AM
Scot free?????????????? You dont think she grieves for the loss of her child??? :waitasec:
Of couse she grieves.

But not being punished for her part in the crime is getting away scot free.

gord
01-24-2008, 09:32 AM
Of couse she grieves.

But not being punished for her part in the crime is getting away scot free.

that remains to be seen - we have had no charges yet , the investigation is still on going - we are all waiting to see what happens next

Trino
01-24-2008, 09:34 AM
I know this question was not directed at me but....... Do I (me, myself) think she grieves the loss of her child? Quite frankly, I don't know what to think. I hope she does, I want her too, I want to think that Maddie was loved and is truely missed. However, I have some grave concerns.... I don't think a parent that refuses to be 100% honest with the investigating agency is seriously looking for their child; I don't think a parent that refuses to answer questions put forth by the investigating agency is truely looking for their child; I don't think a parent that charges for posters is truely seeking the location of their missing child; I don't think a parent that has to hire a "spokesperson" to run interference is truely being honest and looking for their missing child; I don't think a parent that leaves the area the child went missing from without having first made sure the investigating agency had the most accurate and honest information available is truely looking for their missing child.

At this point - I think both Gerry and Kate are more interested in having the media noise die down so that they can get on with their lives then they are in finding Maddie. I believe when the time comes we will see a great legal fight to keep the McCann's from going back to Portugal.

I don't begrudge them jogging or even spending money on their mortgage, however given all the money they received and the fact that it is FREE to download a picture, I definitely begrudge them the 10 cents for the posters. I begrudge them "Maddie's" website which appears to be more about making money than finding their daughter and I begrudge and judge them on their failure to be 100% honest with LE so that LE's best efforts could be put forward to find Maddie. If the McCanns were not involved and Maddie was truely abducted, I can see no evidence or media leaks that indicate the McCanns put their best efforts forward to find their daughter. None, nada, zip. So, no I don't really think they are missing and/or grieving for Maddie. Actions speak louder than words and so far, the McCanns haven't been very good with their words and their lack of action is screaming at me. And I find all of this very, very sad for Maddie. Salem

Excellent post. You've summarize quite well what most posters have been thinking and feeling.

daffodil
01-24-2008, 10:57 AM
Of couse she grieves.

But not being punished for her part in the crime is getting away scot free.

No,it isnt imo

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-24-2008, 11:08 AM
No,it isnt imo


Hey Daff,

What is your take on the whole sketch of the "creepy man/abductor" turned pig farmer. Do you have any thoughts on any of that? Do you think there is any truth to any of it or do you think the PLE is lying.

I haven't read where you or the other McCann supporters have commented on that issue. just interested

colomom
01-24-2008, 12:14 PM
Photofit: Police dismisses any connection to the case
PJ has already spoken to suspect

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1936074&postcount=206

ThoughtFox
01-24-2008, 02:36 PM
Photofit: Police dismisses any connection to the case
PJ has already spoken to suspect

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1936074&postcount=206

:woohoo: I posted more thoughts on the other thread, but I am so glad they nipped this in the bud so quickly.

Pinkhammer
01-24-2008, 03:29 PM
Jane Tanner is seriously delusional and should be under psychiatric care, IMHO.

ThoughtFox
01-24-2008, 03:34 PM
Or she's trying too hard to "help" her friends, or to save herself from serious scrutiny. Maybe she even fooled herself that she 'saw' Madeleine - we've had people all over the world thinking they saw her.

But I would say this shoots down any credibility that Jane Tanner ever had.

Texana
01-24-2008, 08:18 PM
Or she's trying too hard to "help" her friends, or to save herself from serious scrutiny. Maybe she even fooled herself that she 'saw' Madeleine - we've had people all over the world thinking they saw her.

But I would say this shoots down any credibility that Jane Tanner ever had.

Agreed. Her story has changed too many times to be credible--and if she was misrepresented in the press, all it would take is a few letters from her attorney to set things straight. Happens all the time, and it's not that expensive, actually. In fact, I'm sure she and her husband already have an attorney on retainer.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-25-2008, 08:17 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=510483&in_page_id=1811&ct=5


Kate and Gerry McCann are at the centre of a bidding war between Oprah Winfrey and Barbara Walters.

Both celebrities are desperate to land an exclusive deal for the couple to talk about their missing daughter. If it goes ahead, it will be the largest publicly-known amount ever paid for a broadcast interview.


I thought Oprah claims she has never paid a guest to appear on her show? I don't know if I buy this...:eek:

SleuthMom
01-25-2008, 08:39 PM
"because their £1.2million Find Madeleine appeal fund is expected to run dry by June."

To run dry by June??? If this is true, WHAT THE HECK ARE THESE PEOPLE DOING WITH THE MONEY?????????? :eek::eek::eek:

Texana
01-25-2008, 09:28 PM
"because their £1.2million Find Madeleine appeal fund is expected to run dry by June."

To run dry by June??? If this is true, WHAT THE HECK ARE THESE PEOPLE DOING WITH THE MONEY?????????? :eek::eek::eek:

Metado is expensive, obviously. Productive, no, but expensive, yes.

Claycat
01-26-2008, 12:34 AM
There is no truth to the bidding war.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7210340.stm

Gatinho
01-26-2008, 03:39 AM
"because their £1.2million Find Madeleine appeal fund is expected to run dry by June."

To run dry by June??? If this is true, WHAT THE HECK ARE THESE PEOPLE DOING WITH THE MONEY?????????? :eek::eek::eek:


As I put on another thread about the fund - the newspaper 24 Horas stated that the fund is paying 75k Euros per month to Brain Kennedy for him to pay Metodo 3, this is 50k+ GBP or maybe 100k dollars ... for what? Richard Branson is paying towards the McCanns legal defence and Brian Kennedy is giving his solicitor Smethhurst 'free'. Obviously the fund is not being used for the the McCanns legal defence in any way, shape or form. So why is the money donated by well meaning people from around the world who want to help find Madeleine being cycled around in this strange way? Why is it paying such large amounts to what seems a highly ineffective detective agency? Who chose them and why? Even Clarence Mitchell doesn't seem very impressed.

gord
01-26-2008, 05:46 AM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=510483&in_page_id=1811&ct=5



I thought Oprah claims she has never paid a guest to appear on her show? I don't know if I buy this...:eek:

but it is in the newspapers - it must be true

sorry a bit low - but see what I mean about papers just making up any story they want just to get the sensational angle

Claycat
01-26-2008, 10:45 AM
Gord, the Daily Mail is not a reputable news source, per my experience. I posted a comment there. They delay putting the comments up. When I checked later, they had totally changed the wording and meaning of my comment. I wrote them an email telling them I wouldn't be using them as a source again, because they were obviously biased.

The BBC source I posted above has a good article on the fact that there is no bidding war.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-26-2008, 11:37 AM
Gord, the Daily Mail is not a reputable news source, per my experience. I posted a comment there. They delay putting the comments up. When I checked later, they had totally changed the wording and meaning of my comment. I wrote them an email telling them I wouldn't be using them as a source again, because they were obviously biased.

The BBC source I posted above has a good article on the fact that there is no bidding war.

O/T :furious: :furious: :furious: OH MAN! Don't you just hate it when you write a big long post, then it's lost forever when you get that stupid server is busy notice!!!

I won't go into great detail this time, but regardless if Oprah "PAYS" her guests or not...If the McCanns do go on Oprah, they will not leave empty handed. Oprah, (through her sponsors of course) has given away cars, houses, scholarships, wardrobes, cell phones, computers, (sometimes to just ONE family) Also she is noted to give large donations to the guests favorite CHARITY...(to name just a few "gifts")

Oprah's ratings have gone down slightly since becoming a backer of democratic presidential hopeful, Barack Obama. Namely the white, Christian, women of child bearing years....exactly the same group that largely supports the McCanns...

It's a win / win situation.

ThoughtFox
01-26-2008, 12:22 PM
but it is in the newspapers - it must be true

No one here is that gullible, gord. However, I believe it is just as gullible to believe everything the McCanns and their friends say as the gospel truth.

sorry a bit low - but see what I mean about papers just making up any story they want just to get the sensational angle
I don't believe that all newspapers make up stories, and most of these stories are widely reported or confirmed with statements from the people involved.

Newspapers are not "making up" interviews with the McCanns for instance, or interviews with Jane Tanner, or interviews with other people from the resort.

Gatinho
01-26-2008, 03:46 PM
The newspapers are printing by and large what is being fed to them by Team McCann. The problem with the newspapers is not that they make things up - but that they don't check anything or investigate glaring gaps in the story which are obvious to the rest of us. Certainly in the UK the press is on another planet compared with the 'internauts' on here and the general commentators.

gord
01-27-2008, 09:58 AM
No one here is that gullible, gord. However, I believe it is just as gullible to believe everything the McCanns and their friends say as the gospel truth.


I don't believe that all newspapers make up stories, and most of these stories are widely reported or confirmed with statements from the people involved.

Newspapers are not "making up" interviews with the McCanns for instance, or interviews with Jane Tanner, or interviews with other people from the resort.

How many interviews you think Tanner has given to the papers ?

I wold be interested to see what you think .

SleuthMom
01-27-2008, 12:42 PM
Gord, I understand what you are saying but yet again I am puzzled. If you do not believe everything that appears in the newspapers, then you really cannot comment on anything about this case because you are getting all this info from the same media you do not seem to believe. So what do you personally do? Pick and choose?

gord
01-27-2008, 01:26 PM
Gord, I understand what you are saying but yet again I am puzzled. If you do not believe everything that appears in the newspapers, then you really cannot comment on anything about this case because you are getting all this info from the same media you do not seem to believe. So what do you personally do? Pick and choose?


because I dont believe everything that appears in the papers means I cant comment ?? I am not sure that is what you mean

I try to base my views on verified facts - face to face interviews that I see . Or maybe from a particular journalist that I have read before and trust more - Martin Brunt from sky news is not bad .

I know we all have to use the media out there to get the news and I suppose it is up to every individual to make their judgement .

but I have grown up with british press - especialy the tabs - heck half the stuff they print is dubious - thats why they are in and out of the libel courts so often - remenber their moto - never let the truth get in the way of the story

listen I dont know what happened to maddy - no one does apart from the people responsible - I post here because |am intersested in true crime - from all areas - I want to see justice in this case - nut as such I have not yet seen a tough enough case that proves to me the Mccaans killed their daughter

SleuthMom
01-27-2008, 01:37 PM
because I dont believe everything that appears in the papers means I cant comment ?? I am not sure that is what you mean

First of all let me say that I appreciate your posts and I always look forward to read them. What I meant was something similar. You always talk about certain news on the Media and pretty much bash the UK press...so my point is, if MOST of the information we are getting on this case is from the press, how do you go about commenting if you are not keen about the Media? What parameters do you use to choose what you think may be true or what may be trash?

I know we all have to use the media out there to get the news and I suppose it is up to every individual to make their judgement .

My point, we all pick and choose what seems to be credible. Unfortunately, those who support the Mc Canns and those who do not dont seem to believe always from the same sources.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-29-2008, 10:55 AM
I had never seen the web page posted below, I thought I would post it for those of you who hadn't seen it either. What I find disturbing about it is the collage near the bottom. It's the 4th from the bottom. It has a pink background, and a picture of Madeleine as a baby with Kate, another of an older Madeleine and a poem written on it. The Poem starts out as:

This time, this place
Misused, Mistakes
Too long, Too late
Just one chance
Just one breath
Just in case there is one left.
'Cause you know,
you know, you know...

In a previous poem it said Love Mom. I wonder of Kate wrote this one too. It is very erie.

http://officialmadeleinemccann.piczo.com/?g=45730683&cr=5

daffodil
01-29-2008, 11:18 AM
I had never seen the web page posted below, I thought I would post it for those of you who hadn't seen it either. What I find disturbing about it is the collage near the bottom. It's the 4th from the bottom. It has a pink background, and a picture of Madeleine as a baby with Kate, another of an older Madeleine and a poem written on it. The Poem starts out as:

This time, this place
Misused, Mistakes
Too long, Too late
Just one chance
Just one breath
Just in case there is one left.
'Cause you know,
you know, you know...

In a previous poem it said Love Mom. I wonder of Kate wrote this one too. It is very erie.

http://officialmadeleinemccann.piczo.com/?g=45730683&cr=5


I dont see "Love Mom" it looks more like "Love Nan" to me.Kate did NOT write those words,they are the words of a SONG by Nickleback taken from the album All The Right Reasons.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-29-2008, 11:32 AM
I dont see "Love Mom" it looks more like "Love Nan" to me.Kate did NOT write those words,they are the words of a SONG by Nickleback taken from the album All The Right Reasons.

Thank you for clearing that up. They should have given credit where credit is due. Surely Nickleback would appreciate the copyright of HIS/HER song being protected...huh? I noticed they gave credit to a particular potographer on a few pictures, but on one which was a cropped and rotated version of the same picture they did not credit the potographer. :waitasec:

ETA: I noticed there was a report button. I went ahead and reported them for copyright infringement. Thanks again for pointing that out Daff

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-29-2008, 11:56 AM
http://officialmadeleinemccann.piczo.com/?g=45730683&cr=5

I noticed something else strange that maybe Daffodil can clear up in regards to the web sight posted above. There are 3 pictures credited to a Photographer named Paul Grover, After a google search, I find he's a pretty important man in London. Why do you suppose they hired him to photograph Madeline in a kiddie pool with makeup and no bathing suit top? Now that is weird. I could see mom & pop taking candid pictures of the kiddos swimming in the buff as being quite innocent, but a professional? It is a pretty picture of Maddie, and only reveals that she has no top on...(nothing dirty about it, except they let a grown man take pictures of their daughter without a top on). I wonder if it's the "best" of that photo shoot? That is weird.

Texana
01-29-2008, 04:03 PM
But Paul Grover sounds like it could be the name of more than one person...maybe there's more than one guy with that name.

Just a thought.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-29-2008, 05:13 PM
But Paul Grover sounds like it could be the name of more than one person...maybe there's more than one guy with that name.

Just a thought.

I suppose there are several Paul Grover's in this world, but the only two I could find in the UK was a famous (celebrity) photographer, and an architect. (Possibly the same guy?) Since it's that name printed on 3 portraits of the McCanns, (one family picture, 1 topless pool picture of Maddie, and the picture of Maddie on the floor, with her head turned back). I am guessing it's him, but maybe it's just a neighbor kid...but still, who ever it is, his name is on a picture of Madeleine that should not have been taken by anyone other than her doctor or her parents.

The McCanns are reminding me more of the Ramsey's every day. If you take 3 very famous UNSOLVED U.S. cold cases:

Jon-Benet Ramsey - Murdered Beauty Queen of wealthy parents
Natalie Holloway - Vanished at a popular foreign beach resort area
Johnny Gosch - alleged abduction by a government paedophile ring

Walla, You've got the McCanns.

ThoughtFox
01-30-2008, 09:40 AM
I don't see anything wrong with showing a little baby "topless," even if it is a girl. Most people who have kids who play in the water have tons of pictures like that - I know I do.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-30-2008, 10:42 AM
I don't see anything wrong with showing a little baby "topless," even if it is a girl. Most people who have kids who play in the water have tons of pictures like that - I know I do.

Like I said in my previous post, if it was a picture taken by mom and dad, with the kid/s splashing and playing in the buff...I'd think nothing of it. I too have several tub/pool pictures that are priceless. It's the fact that she has makeup on and a "Professional" potographer took it is what is foreboding to me.

Call me old fashion, (and maybe a bit modest) but a topless glamor shot of a 2 or 3 year old with bright red lipstick, (by a professional potographer) is strange.:eek: I also don't think that is the only picture like that. I don't know many potographers who only take one picture in a photo shoot.

teacherbees
01-30-2008, 11:01 AM
Like I said in my previous post, if it was a picture taken by mom and dad, with the kid/s splashing and playing in the buff...I'd think nothing of it. I too have several tub/pool pictures that are priceless. It's the fact that she has makeup on and a "Professional" potographer took it is what is foreboding to me.

Call me old fashion, (and maybe a bit modest) but a topless glamor shot of a 2 or 3 year old with bright red lipstick, (by a professional potographer) is strange.:eek: I also don't think that is the only picture like that. I don't know many potographers who only take one picture in a photo shoot.


I absolutely agree with you in these sentiments. Studio pictures of a topless girl seem distasteful and exploitive to me, at just about any age.

That said, the picture in question is muted such that I'm not 100 percent certain Maddie is topless. Looking at the form of the shoulder area and to the right side of the photo, it may be that she has a towel draped over her.

daffodil
01-30-2008, 11:04 AM
Like I said in my previous post, if it was a picture taken by mom and dad, with the kid/s splashing and playing in the buff...I'd think nothing of it. I too have several tub/pool pictures that are priceless. It's the fact that she has makeup on and a "Professional" potographer took it is what is foreboding to me.

Call me old fashion, (and maybe a bit modest) but a topless glamor shot of a 2 or 3 year old with bright red lipstick, (by a professional potographer) is strange.:eek: I also don't think that is the only picture like that. I don't know many potographers who only take one picture in a photo shoot.

I would HARDLY call it a "glamour shot" and I doubt that IS lipstick but possibly re-touching of the photo during developing.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-30-2008, 11:58 AM
I would HARDLY call it a "glamour shot" and I doubt that IS lipstick but possibly re-touching of the photo during developing.

That's fine Daffodil, you can call it anything you want.

You suppose they "re-touched" and added the lipstick smudged below her lip and on her chin? Oh maybe those are just sores....hummm, wonder why they didn't re-touch those while they where at it.

Why would they re-touch a photo to make her lips red, but not retouch skin blotches?

ThoughtFox
01-30-2008, 12:28 PM
That's fine Daffodil, you can call it anything you want.

You suppose they "re-touched" and added the lipstick smudged below her lip and on her chin? Oh maybe those are just sores....hummm, wonder why they didn't re-touch those while they where at it.

Why would they re-touch a photo to make her lips red, but not retouch skin blotches?
I'm not trying to argue that it's right to take picture of little girls wearing make-up - I hate that.

But . . . in this case, that looks more like a photo that has had a darker photo-filter overlay of some sort in the photoshopping process. The blue is very blue and her lips are very red - none of it looks natural. Even her skin looks darker. So I'm not sure that is lipstick, since if you look up and down the page her lips are naturally dark pink anway.

My daughter has had very pink lips since the day she was born, and often people would ask her if she was wearing lipgloss, which I never allowed until she was 10 or 11! :rolleyes: Madeleine also has naturally pink lips, but in this case, I really think that picture has been darkened so it's not natural anymore. I'm not saying I like it or that it's in good taste, but I'm also not sure it has any sinister overtone.

What would this photographer have to do with her disappearance anyway? :waitasec: Are you making the case that the McCanns were shopping her around to people using that photo? I guess maybe I'm wondering about the point of this.

daffodil
01-30-2008, 12:40 PM
There is no point.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-30-2008, 12:54 PM
I'm not trying to argue that it's right to take picture of little girls wearing make-up - I hate that.

But . . . in this case, that looks more like a photo that has had a darker photo-filter overlay of some sort in the photoshopping process. The blue is very blue and her lips are very red - none of it looks natural. Even her skin looks darker. So I'm not sure that is lipstick, since if you look up and down the page her lips are naturally dark pink anway.

My daughter has had very pink lips since the day she was born, and often people would ask her if she was wearing lipgloss, which I never allowed until she was 10 or 11! :rolleyes: Madeleine also has naturally pink lips, but in this case, I really think that picture has been darkened so it's not natural anymore. I'm not saying I like it or that it's in good taste, but I'm also not sure it has any sinister overtone.

What would this photographer have to do with her disappearance anyway? :waitasec: Are you making the case that the McCanns were shopping her around to people using that photo? I guess maybe I'm wondering about the point of this.

Well, first, if we discuss anything in the media, we are told by a few, that everything in the media is a lie...(except when it flames the PLE). So I thought I would find new things to discuss that had nothing to do with the media coverage of this case. Obviously we can't discuss real pictures taken by real professional photographers either...

The reason I find these couple of "head" shots interesting is because I wonder if the McCanns ever tried to get Madeleine into show business. They look like maybe they where a part of a portfolio. I have found 2 references that indicate that there is a famous UK Celebrity photographer named Paul Grover. I don't know if the signature stamp on Maddies pictures are his or not.

MAYBE, the McCanns where hoping Maddie could be the next Mary-Kate or Ashley Olsen (or who-ever)...And something went horribly wrong... Maybe someone DID kidnap her, because they saw these beautiful, (can't say glamorous) pictures of Madeleine where she is made up to look enticing to a talent scout...(but unfortunately to a sick Paedophile as well).

Rino
01-30-2008, 01:01 PM
I would HARDLY call it a "glamour shot" and I doubt that IS lipstick but possibly re-touching of the photo during developing.
Yeah, me too. I just don't see anything wrong on this one...

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-30-2008, 03:04 PM
Yeah, me too. I just don't see anything wrong on this one...

I find it hard to believe that so many people would let a grown man take topless pictures of their toddler girls. Why wasn't a bathing suit used? Would a swim suit take away from the adorable girl in the photo? What is the point of this picture? It's a swimming pool, not a bath tub. Most people wear bathing suits in swimming pools. Some may think this is a cute an innocent picture, but to ingrain in your child's mind that it is okay to pose this way, is not natural. If Mom and Dad are telling Madeleine it is okay to pose topless for a some male photographer, than she will be willing to pose for anyone...even a paedo (at daycare, or for a friends pervert father...(yes it happens) preschool, or a church, Lord forbid.) Do you really think a 2 or 3 year old can distinguish who is a "good guy" and who is a "sicko?"

SleuthMom
01-30-2008, 03:58 PM
Like I said in my previous post, if it was a picture taken by mom and dad, with the kid/s splashing and playing in the buff...I'd think nothing of it. I too have several tub/pool pictures that are priceless. It's the fact that she has makeup on and a "Professional" potographer took it is what is foreboding to me.

Call me old fashion, (and maybe a bit modest) but a topless glamor shot of a 2 or 3 year old with bright red lipstick, (by a professional potographer) is strange.:eek: I also don't think that is the only picture like that. I don't know many potographers who only take one picture in a photo shoot.

Could you post a link of the single picture in question? Thanks.

ThoughtFox
01-30-2008, 05:23 PM
Could you post a link of the single picture in question? Thanks.

Sure:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v624/sip44/MadeleineMcCann.jpg

SleuthMom
01-30-2008, 09:41 PM
Thanks ThoughtFox! :)

Is that the real size pic or was cut?

ThoughtFox
01-30-2008, 10:24 PM
Thanks ThoughtFox! :)

Is that the real size pic or was cut?
I don't think there is any way to tell, is there? I assume they used that photo because it was a good picture of her face, but that's just me.

ThoughtFox
01-30-2008, 10:27 PM
Clarence is spinning again, and he's overlooking the fact that the McCanns have never been "cleared" as Arguidos.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080130/wl_uk_afp/britainportugalmissing;_ylt=A9G_RzzkBaFHGHcAmB5vaA 8F

Wed Jan 30, 5:39 PM ET

LONDON (AFP) - Police do not suspect the parents of missing toddler Madeleine McCann were involved in her disappearance, the couple's spokesman said on Wednesday.

During a debate on media coverage of the child's disappearance, Clarence Mitchell told a packed theatre at the London School of Economics that officials, whom he did not identify, had told him in private briefings that the case was being treated as a "rare stranger abduction".

"I have also had briefings privately from the police and the Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre that also gave me complete reassurance that the authorities, in this country certainly, are treating this as a case of rare stranger abduction, as they call it," he said.


:rolleyes: Go, Clarence, Go! I guess this means that tomorrow all the charges will be dropped?

Um, no, probably not. :crazy:

gord
01-31-2008, 03:27 AM
Clarence is spinning again, and he's overlooking the fact that the McCanns have never been "cleared" as Arguidos.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080130/wl_uk_afp/britainportugalmissing;_ylt=A9G_RzzkBaFHGHcAmB5vaA 8F



:rolleyes: Go, Clarence, Go! I guess this means that tomorrow all the charges will be dropped?

Um, no, probably not. :crazy:

Sorry must have missed it have they been charged ? when did that happen ?

april4sky
01-31-2008, 07:44 AM
Madeleine: Investigation a 'fiasco' as bungling Portuguese police fail to send crucial documents to British authorities

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=511426&in_page_id=1770

ThoughtFox
01-31-2008, 08:38 AM
Sorry must have missed it have they been charged ? when did that happen ?
Sorry - I meant that all "suspician" had been dropped. It was late at night here, lol.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
01-31-2008, 02:05 PM
Madeleine: Investigation a 'fiasco' as bungling Portuguese police fail to send crucial documents to British authorities

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=511426&in_page_id=1770


:slap: Well, that explains everything! So do you believe this? Is it true?

colomom
01-31-2008, 02:23 PM
Another case of believing that which we chose to believe....

in 24Horas this morning:

http://24horasnewspaper.com/total.php?numero=2754&link=10

Rogatory letter was in England but was returned to the State Attorney
English tantrum delays process

The letter that was destinated to interrogate the McCanns and their friends returned because of simple bureaucratic problems. The PJ was unaware of this whole story

A veritable 'tantrum' from the English is delaying the conclusion of the investigations into the Madeleine case. The English have already held the letter that contains the questions that the PJ wants to be asked from the McCann family and their friends - sent by Eurojust, the European entity that is competent to establish the judicial connection between various countries - but their understanding was that some bureaucratic formalities were not being observed. And they requested a new letter.

[continues, see full article in Portuguese Press thread]

gord
01-31-2008, 03:40 PM
who knows what is going on -

The only thing is that in the 21st century police forces across the world are well geared to cooperate withe each other - arrest suspects - etc it is not exactly rocket science - I cannot believe that the UK goverement at Home Office / Home sec level are obstructing this case - they have got enough to do without getting embroiled in a messy murder case where they would get burned for no gain.

Why dont the PJ just charge them - they have the evidence we are led to believe - get them over and then either go to the next stage or let them go .

If they were formally charged then there would be no argument - it happens all the time

I just cant see why the PJ seem to be delaying things. It is their case they are in charge - forget all this powerfull friends - Just charge them and get them back -

colomom
01-31-2008, 05:18 PM
who knows what is going on -

The only thing is that in the 21st century police forces across the world are well geared to cooperate withe each other - arrest suspects - etc it is not exactly rocket science - I cannot believe that the UK goverement at Home Office / Home sec level are obstructing this case - they have got enough to do without getting embroiled in a messy murder case where they would get burned for no gain.

Why dont the PJ just charge them - they have the evidence we are led to believe - get them over and then either go to the next stage or let them go .

If they were formally charged then there would be no argument - it happens all the time

I just cant see why the PJ seem to be delaying things. It is their case they are in charge - forget all this powerfull friends - Just charge them and get them back -

Gord,

Please tell us about exactly what is involved if the PJ want to charge the McCanns. How do they proceed? What is the first step? How do they make an arrest?

Thanks, in advance.

gord
01-31-2008, 07:12 PM
Gord,

Please tell us about exactly what is involved if the PJ want to charge the McCanns. How do they proceed? What is the first step? How do they make an arrest?

Thanks, in advance.

They present their evidence to our police ( which we are led to believe is pretty sound ) , who in turn would then arrest the Mccaans on behalf of the PJ - then the there is a 48 hour period where the case would be looked at by the prosecution authorities ( the equivelant of your DA ) if the case seems sound then it would proceed . A judge would probably give bail and because it is across borders extradition papers would have to be issued and then it would take a while - . But this is the European Community - not two nations with no ties . The process has been tried and tested many times

now in saying all that my feel is that the PJ dont have anything concrete - ie they have no hard evidence apart from what they think and the whole inconsistency in the statements . - even though I would have thought they would have enough to at least issue charges to start getting things done -

I have seen cases where suspects in assalt cases get at least arrested over seas by other police forces . LA agencies tend to cooperate with each other - if the PJ contacted the Local police in Leicester and said we have firm reason to believe that these people have comitted murder - then they would be aressted in days

It will be a year in 3 months time

ThoughtFox
02-01-2008, 12:57 AM
Another case of believing that which we chose to believe....

in 24Horas this morning:

http://24horasnewspaper.com/total.php?numero=2754&link=10

Rogatory letter was in England but was returned to the State Attorney
English tantrum delays process

The letter that was destinated to interrogate the McCanns and their friends returned because of simple bureaucratic problems. The PJ was unaware of this whole story

A veritable 'tantrum' from the English is delaying the conclusion of the investigations into the Madeleine case. The English have already held the letter that contains the questions that the PJ wants to be asked from the McCann family and their friends - sent by Eurojust, the European entity that is competent to establish the judicial connection between various countries - but their understanding was that some bureaucratic formalities were not being observed. And they requested a new letter.

[continues, see full article in Portuguese Press thread]
Thanks for the article, colomom!

So there seems to be confusion, but possibly stonewalling on the part of the British government. Why does this not surprise me? :rolleyes:

Barnaby
02-01-2008, 09:27 AM
So hard to know who to believe in article below:

Madeleine: Investigation a 'fiasco' as bungling Portuguese police fail to send crucial documents to British authorities
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=511426&in_page_id=1770)


"Then in a humiliating public climbdown, the Attorney General's office in Lisbon was forced to admit that it had not yet sent them to Whitehall"

Gatinho
02-01-2008, 02:31 PM
So hard to know who to believe in article below:

Madeleine: Investigation a 'fiasco' as bungling Portuguese police fail to send crucial documents to British authorities
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=511426&in_page_id=1770)


"Then in a humiliating public climbdown, the Attorney General's office in Lisbon was forced to admit that it had not yet sent them to Whitehall"


Barnaby - many people have believed the Daily Mail and lived to regret it :) .

Barnaby
02-01-2008, 10:10 PM
Barnaby - many people have believed the Daily Mail and lived to regret it :) .
True :)

ThoughtFox
02-04-2008, 07:29 AM
A local reservoir is being searched, and a possible link to a missing Spanish boy.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/2008/02/04/spanish-cops-link-missing-boy-to-madeleine-mccann-86908-20309039/

Jeremy Vargas vanished from his home in Gran Canaria just eight weeks before four-year-old Madeleine went missing in Praia da Luz.

Detectives hunting for the boy have told his parents they are now working closely with cops in Portugal.

. . . Yesterday, divers continued to search a reservoir for Madeleine's body following a tip-off from an underworld source to a lawyer. The search at Barragem do Arade - 40 miles from Praia da Luz - is being funded by Marcos Correia, who claims he was told she was murdered and thrown into a lake last May.

Correia, who would not reveal his source, said: "I am convinced this is the place."


Also, this - take it for what it's worth. I believe some of these reservoirs have already been searched:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2008/01/12/madeleine-mccann-dumped-in-lake-claims-lawyer-89520-20282279/

ThoughtFox
02-04-2008, 07:35 AM
OK, here's more: this "lawyer" from Madeira was financing a "search" of his own in the reservoir, and it makes sense that the police would also send searchers, since this could be someone actually planting the body there for all they know.


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23435621-details/Divers+search+for+Madeleine%27s+body+in+remote+res ervoir+after+underworld+tip-off/article

...He said he believed the abductor killed the child, weighted down her body and then threw it from a pumping tower into the murky water beneath.

His team of six divers have already found a five-metre length of knotted nylon cord, which has been handed in to Portuguese police for analysis.

The remote reservoir is surrounded by dense woodland but a dirt track cuts through it to a bridge which links the water tower to the shore.



My problem with this is that by their own admission, the McCanns drove around further than 40 miles in the countryside, so even if they find her, the parents are not exonerated.

gord
02-04-2008, 08:41 AM
OK, here's more: this "lawyer" from Madeira was financing a "search" of his own in the reservoir, and it makes sense that the police would also send searchers, since this could be someone actually planting the body there for all they know.


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23435621-details/Divers+search+for+Madeleine%27s+body+in+remote+res ervoir+after+underworld+tip-off/article (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23435621-details/Divers+search+for+Madeleine%27s+body+in+remote+res ervoir+after+underworld+tip-off/article)



My problem with this is that by their own admission, the McCanns drove around further than 40 miles in the countryside, so even if they find her, the parents are not exonerated.

I would wait until they find something before we jump the gun and go all out with who did it theories

It is very sad but the search brings the reality that whatever and whoever happened to Maddy - she is most likely dead .

I have read that in most child abductions the child is usualy killed with 24 to 48 hours and then the body disposed of

yes of course the parents could still be in the frame -

anyway there seems to be a few things happening at the moment more than the usual

time will tell

ThoughtFox
02-04-2008, 03:21 PM
It's a curious thing.

They say she was snatched by a Pedophile Ring. To me, the reason for a group to stalk and kidnap a child would be to keep her alive somewhere, or to sell her to another group. Over and over we have been told by various "witnesses" that she is being "held" in various countries, and even the McCanns have said that.

Yet we know that most Pedophiles do kill children within 24 hours, and most child-snatchings are done in the heat of the moment with no forethought. I'm recalling what we learned in the case of Danielle Van Dam, the little girl in California who was stolen by a "friendly" neighbor who then dumped her body for the coyotes to eat. He kept her for about one day before he killed her. He was not a member of a ring, but he did have porn on his computer of the worst kind, so horrible it made the jury weep.

It seems to me that it can't be both things. If Madeleine was stalked and kidnapped, then it would be for child-porn purposes. If she was killed immediately, then there is no pay-off for such a risk, and it must be the work of a lone person instead of a "ring" of people.

None of it makes alot of sense, but these things never do.

I might add that in the case of the Van Dam child, the guilty man was convicted based on one strand of hair in his sink, a spot of blood on his coat, and the fact that a cadaver dog hit on his camper. From what we have heard, there is just as much, or as little, evidence in this case, but it leads to the parents instead of a child molester.

ThoughtFox
02-04-2008, 03:39 PM
From Sky News:

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1303934,00.html?f=rss

The frogmen are trawling for clues in Silves, 40 miles from where the British girl vanished in Praia da Luz.

But Brian Healey, 67, said: "They haven't found anything yet. We have to believe a miracle can happen.

"I still believe she is alive and, until someone tells me different, I will believe."

The divers are not police officers and detectives have already checked the reservoir and ruled it out.

The current search is being paid for by a Portuguese lawyer who claims to have underworld contacts.


That's a little different spin than the tabloids, for sure. Saying this guy is an attorney "with underworld contacts" is more negative than the articles who called him a "good Samaritan." :clap: :) :crazy: That's pretty funny actually.

Also, the Grandfather says "they haven't found anything" even the attorney talked about a "knotted rope." Of course, that rope could be anything.

Note that the divers are not associated with police, and they've already searched that reservoir, which is what I thought because I recognized some of the pictures of the place. But also, that contradicts the tabloids that said there were police divers participating.

Prickle
02-04-2008, 06:19 PM
The search for Maddie is becoming more bizarre as each day passes, no one knows any more than they did 6 months ago. Hot leads go cold in no time at all and hopes are dashed on a daily basis.

As a matter of concern, is no one looking for little Mari Luz Cortes who has been missing since January 13th. I find it so sad that here is this little girl, missing in the same way as Maddie and yet nothing in the papers, not a fraction of the publicity given to Madeleine.

Does anyone know anything at all regarding little Mari ?

Texana
02-04-2008, 06:47 PM
It's a curious thing.

They say she was snatched by a Pedophile Ring. To me, the reason for a group to stalk and kidnap a child would be to keep her alive somewhere, or to sell her to another group. Over and over we have been told by various "witnesses" that she is being "held" in various countries, and even the McCanns have said that.

Yet we know that most Pedophiles do kill children within 24 hours, and most child-snatchings are done in the heat of the moment with no forethought. I'm recalling what we learned in the case of Danielle Van Dam, the little girl in California who was stolen by a "friendly" neighbor who then dumped her body for the coyotes to eat. He kept her for about one day before he killed her. He was not a member of a ring, but he did have porn on his computer of the worst kind, so horrible it made the jury weep.

It seems to me that it can't be both things. If Madeleine was stalked and kidnapped, then it would be for child-porn purposes. If she was killed immediately, then there is no pay-off for such a risk, and it must be the work of a lone person instead of a "ring" of people.



I agree with your reasoning. If there is any truth to the abductor story, it's someone who acted alone.

txsvicki
02-04-2008, 10:29 PM
What is the McCann's reasoning to believe that a pedophile ring took Madeline and not a lone pedophile? An international ring would definitely be a better story to try and raise money. If they really do suspect these rings, then why don't they alert Europe against vacationing in certain areas and leaving children alone.

ThoughtFox
02-04-2008, 11:17 PM
What is the McCann's reasoning to believe that a pedophile ring took Madeline and not a lone pedophile? An international ring would definitely be a better story to try and raise money. If they really do suspect these rings, then why don't they alert Europe against vacationing in certain areas and leaving children alone.
It's a mystery to me why they don't. :confused:

I wonder if any of the Tapas Nine is planning a vacation abroad this year?

Texana
02-04-2008, 11:43 PM
It's a mystery to me why they don't. :confused:

I wonder if any of the Tapas Nine is planning a vacation abroad this year?

Probably.
:furious:

gord
02-05-2008, 05:51 AM
I might add that in the case of the Van Dam child, the guilty man was convicted based on one strand of hair in his sink, a spot of blood on his coat, and the fact that a cadaver dog hit on his camper. From what we have heard, there is just as much, or as little, evidence in this case, but it leads to the parents instead of a child molester.


there is also the point that in the Van dam case the minute DNA evidence put the girl in a place she shouldnt have been - ie it created a link between the perp and the victim - however small . It is how a lot of cold cases now are being solved - officers going back and examining minute pieces of evidence from say twenty years back - getting DNA traces which in turn lead to a new suspect and in a lot of cases a successful prosection .

In this case it will be perfectly normal for minute pieces of Maddy's DNA / hair to appear in and around the Mccaans -

it is the one area that concerns me on this case - there has been a massive improvement in DNA detection over the years - I would have thiought that if there was damming evidence it might have come out by now - the PJ would have moved

They might be keeping their tinder dry - but I dont see why

SleuthMom
02-05-2008, 10:35 AM
it is the one area that concerns me on this case - there has been a massive improvement in DNA detection over the years - I would have thiought that if there was damming evidence it might have come out by now - the PJ would have moved

I agree. Maybe two things:

1. We are speaking about Portugal here, not the US or UK.

OR

2. The DNA evidence is not strong enough to charge anyone.

daffodil
02-05-2008, 11:43 AM
I would agree with both those.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
02-07-2008, 03:58 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,329272,00.html


Report: Top Portuguese Cop Says There Are More Important Things to Do Than Find Madeleine McCann

A high-ranking Portuguese police official declared Thursday that his colleagues have more important things to do than try to find missing British girl Madeleine McCann.
The shocking admission, published in the Portuguese newspaper 24 Horas, came as police were reportedly preparing an "exit strategy" from the case, sources told the newspaper.
"There are bigger problems in the PJ than the Maddie case," Carlos Anjos, head of the Judicial Police (PJ) Inspectors Union, told the newspaper.
Anjos' comments followed a statement by the national director of the PJ, Alipio Ribeiro, in which he admitted that authorities had acted "hastily" in making Madeleine's parents, Gerry and Kate McCann, formal suspects in their daughter's disappearance.


More at link :(

colomom
02-07-2008, 05:58 PM
Thanks to Bat E Bird on Proboards 79:

Hi all, I won't be on for long tonight but I've just seen this from Tony Bennett on Anorak:

350
Tony Bennett Says:

February 7th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
THE MADELEINE FOUNDATION

170 delboy says (February 7th, 2008 at 11:53 am):

re: “Tony Bennett says: ‘I may try, with others, to raise funds to obtain a barrister’s legal opinion on whether the McCanns could be successfully prosecuted for their admitted child neglect (under the Children and Young Persons Act 1933) in this country. I estimate the toal cost of obtaining it would be no more than £1,000 and we will try and do that through the vehicle of the recently-formed Madeleine Foundation’.”

Tony is there an address for donations, can you put it on Anorak….

====================

REPLY: In today’s post came news that our bank account has been opened.

The Madeleine Foundation is a democratic memebrship organisation which anyone can join for £10, so long as they subscribe to the aims as stated in our draft constitution, which are:

a) to make every effort to ensure that Kate and Gerry McCann are prosecuted for their admitted abandoning of their children six nights in a row in Praia da Luz

b) to change the law in whatever way is needed in order to send out a clear message to all parents that leaving young children on their own is never acceptable, and to strive for the adoption of a ‘Madeleine’s Law’ with its key message: “Never leave young children on their own”

c) to pursue - in conjunction with others - the truth about Madeleine McCann’s disappearance on 3 May 2007, and in particular to encourage Kate and Gerry McCann and the friends who were with them in Praia da Luz to tell the truth about Madeleine’s disappearance

d) to investigate the facts behind the extent of British government involvement in this case and the reasons for it

e) to ensure that the media, in particular the British media, report this case accurately and give due weight to the opinions of so many of the general public that the McCanns are withholding the truth about Madeleine’s disappearance

f) to demand a full-scale investigation by the relevant authorities into the activities of the Find Madeleine Fund private trust and to encourage the trustees of that fund to give full particulars about its income and expenditure to the public who have donated so generously to it with the express purpose of finding Madeleine

g) to generally promote the welfare of children, in particular by ensuring that parents are aware of the psychological needs of their children and ensuring that the relevant authorities take appropriate action to safeguard and promote the welfare of children.

Initial funds raised will be put first of all to obtaining an authoritative legal opinion from a barrister on whether or not the McCanns could be successfully prosecuted for child neglect in this country. This money will go to an instructing solicitor - NOT me - and to a barrister. We intend to publish the barrister’s opinion on our website.

Three domain names have been registered and will be publicised shortly.

Applications for memberhip or donations should be sent to:

Tony Bennett, 66 Chippingfield, HARLOW, Essex, CM17 0DJ and cheques should be made out to ‘The Madeleine Foundation’.

I emphasise that this is a *membership* organisation and we invite *anyone* to join and if they wish become actively involved in realising our aims
*********************

Anyone know how much £10 is in US Dollars?

daffodil
02-07-2008, 07:30 PM
A-F,never gonna happen.G- good idea.

scandi
02-07-2008, 09:52 PM
Hi Everyone.

Tonight I happened on this remarkable video that takes one right back to the heart of Madeleine's case, The REAL Madeleine McCann Story produced by Spudgun.

Thinking there might be many here who haven't seen it, or it's been awhile, it seems to put everything in perspective that we have learned. In such a medium Madeleine appears to be right there, and when you see her standing in her little red dress you might feel a tear or two slip down your cheek. All Good!

Sit back and relax, and Thanks again to Spudgun:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRvgK6M2_7Q

gord
02-08-2008, 06:25 AM
its that the same Tony Bennet - who sings in vegas ? might as well be

I have no idea who he is - what is motivation is - maybe he sees a good way to make a few bob - who knows plenty people might send him money

I like some of his objectives to take on the British goverment - cause we dont believe them , and also the whole of the British Media - cause we dont like the way you write - please only write things against the Mccaans - oh and we probably want to change the law as well

anyway - it is an interesting site - oh and £10 is about $20 of your US dollars Colomom if you want to get your cheque book out !

ThoughtFox
02-08-2008, 03:01 PM
I think about as many people here will give to that, as gave to the McCanns. Probably zero.

For one thing, if anyone in the British Govt. cared, something would have been done long before now. I've come to the conclusion that the UK only cares about defending the McCanns instead of discovering the truth. No judge is going to stand up to that because they just don't give a flying fig.

They can blame it on the Portuguese police, but Madeleine is a citizen of the U.K. and though she was just a child, that doesn't mean her parents rights supersede her own.

So I'm skeptical now that the British Govt wants to find out what happened to her. It would be bad for their image. It would be bad for tourism or something. It would make them all feel badly because the McCanns are so pretty and successful, and they play tennis so well, and like to run around talking about running around. It's like watching an ant farm, the way this case is playing out.

Also, they are crappy diplomats if they can't work out those rogatory letters in seven or eight months. That is nonsense. Are you telling me there isn't someone in Britain who can translate Portuguese into understandable English?

Until someone can explain this to me, I'm blaming the British government, because as far as I can see, they are foot draggers and cowards who won't confront an injustice done to a small child in a foreign country. :furious:

gord
02-08-2008, 07:08 PM
Thought fox

I am going to try an answer your question as best as I can , without getting into any tit for tat argument that seem to be so often about this case - not just here , but in every internet forum going .

Firstly in the UK there is a clear distinction between the goverment and the law - this has grown up over many hundreds of years so that the legal system in this land can operate without any bias from whatever party or goverment is in rule at the time . I believe that the US has not a disimillar point of view . It is all about keeping our elected officials within the law - after all they are only elected officials - not above the law in any way - this is sacrosanct in our way of life here in the UK - we do trust our democracy and our legal system which as been with us for teh last 500 years plus

Madeline is of course a biritish citizen - and her parents were offered full consular assistance at the time when Maddie went missng - as any citizen abroad would expect - as you would if you were abroad and needed your goverment assitance -

The situation changed as soon as the Portugese Police made the Mccanns suspects or arguidos - the goverment has to step back and let the legal process of both countries take place - that is what happens hundreds of casis where a possible crime has taken place abroad - the law takes over . The law is what needs to take over . as because if we let anything else get in the way we have anarchy . do you honestly think that the British Goverment at senior level - ie PM and foreign secretary ( Milliband ) are going to get themselves involved in a legal battle in anything so drastic as a child murder case - just because they are British . Do we really think that Gerry is so connected that he can get the goverment to pull strings . Come onthis is the Gerry Mccann that gets mocked daily here and in the news - he is a just who he is - a doctor

You feel frustrated - because nothing has happened - there is no charges , you are convinced they did it - but please this case has nothing to do with the British goverment - it is a very sad case where a youg girl has dissapeared .

In a democratic country - as we have in the UK and we have in Portugal - then the legal system decides - not politicians - it is police and judges .

You might not be happy about the lack of outcome - I am not that happy either - but if we cannot trust our police , our judicary then we have nothing -

For you to just drop this at the feet at the goverment is just plain wrong .

( IMHO )

colomom
02-08-2008, 08:01 PM
Thought fox

I am going to try an answer your question as best as I can , without getting into any tit for tat argument that seem to be so often about this case - not just here , but in every internet forum going .

Firstly in the UK there is a clear distinction between the goverment and the law - this has grown up over many hundreds of years so that the legal system in this land can operate without any bias from whatever party or goverment is in rule at the time . I believe that the US has not a disimillar point of view . It is all about keeping our elected officials within the law - after all they are only elected officials - not above the law in any way - this is sacrosanct in our way of life here in the UK - we do trust our democracy and our legal system which as been with us for teh last 500 years plus

Madeline is of course a biritish citizen - and her parents were offered full consular assistance at the time when Maddie went missng - as any citizen abroad would expect - as you would if you were abroad and needed your goverment assitance -

The situation changed as soon as the Portugese Police made the Mccanns suspects or arguidos - the goverment has to step back and let the legal process of both countries take place - that is what happens hundreds of casis where a possible crime has taken place abroad - the law takes over . The law is what needs to take over . as because if we let anything else get in the way we have anarchy . do you honestly think that the British Goverment at senior level - ie PM and foreign secretary ( Milliband ) are going to get themselves involved in a legal battle in anything so drastic as a child murder case - just because they are British . Do we really think that Gerry is so connected that he can get the goverment to pull strings . Come onthis is the Gerry Mccann that gets mocked daily here and in the news - he is a just who he is - a doctor

You feel frustrated - because nothing has happened - there is no charges , you are convinced they did it - but please this case has nothing to do with the British goverment - it is a very sad case where a youg girl has dissapeared .

In a democratic country - as we have in the UK and we have in Portugal - then the legal system decides - not politicians - it is police and judges .

You might not be happy about the lack of outcome - I am not that happy either - but if we cannot trust our police , our judicary then we have nothing -

For you to just drop this at the feet at the goverment is just plain wrong .

( IMHO )

Unless he is MI5....I am just saying....

ThoughtFox
02-08-2008, 11:05 PM
gord: I live in a democratic country, too. :) This has nothing to do with that.

I also live in a big country, but I can mail a letter from where I live to California and it will take two days to get there. That's further, surely, than from Portugal to England.

It took one day for the McCanns to pack up the plantation and fly by to England after they were made Arguidoes.

This stuff about these questions "in the mail" has gone on for months, and it's ridiculous.

My point is that Britain could have sent a special courier to pick up these letters if they were interested in Maddie at all. Instead, they seem glad that it is getting murkier all the time. Their silence is deafening.

april4sky
02-09-2008, 03:04 AM
Thought fox

I am going to try an answer your question as best as I can , without getting into any tit for tat argument that seem to be so often about this case - not just here , but in every internet forum going .

Firstly in the UK there is a clear distinction between the goverment and the law - this has grown up over many hundreds of years so that the legal system in this land can operate without any bias from whatever party or goverment is in rule at the time . I believe that the US has not a disimillar point of view . It is all about keeping our elected officials within the law - after all they are only elected officials - not above the law in any way - this is sacrosanct in our way of life here in the UK - we do trust our democracy and our legal system which as been with us for teh last 500 years plus

Madeline is of course a biritish citizen - and her parents were offered full consular assistance at the time when Maddie went missng - as any citizen abroad would expect - as you would if you were abroad and needed your goverment assitance -

The situation changed as soon as the Portugese Police made the Mccanns suspects or arguidos - the goverment has to step back and let the legal process of both countries take place - that is what happens hundreds of casis where a possible crime has taken place abroad - the law takes over . The law is what needs to take over . as because if we let anything else get in the way we have anarchy . do you honestly think that the British Goverment at senior level - ie PM and foreign secretary ( Milliband ) are going to get themselves involved in a legal battle in anything so drastic as a child murder case - just because they are British . Do we really think that Gerry is so connected that he can get the goverment to pull strings . Come onthis is the Gerry Mccann that gets mocked daily here and in the news - he is a just who he is - a doctor

You feel frustrated - because nothing has happened - there is no charges , you are convinced they did it - but please this case has nothing to do with the British goverment - it is a very sad case where a youg girl has dissapeared .

In a democratic country - as we have in the UK and we have in Portugal - then the legal system decides - not politicians - it is police and judges .

You might not be happy about the lack of outcome - I am not that happy either - but if we cannot trust our police , our judicary then we have nothing -

For you to just drop this at the feet at the goverment is just plain wrong .

( IMHO ) Well said gord. :clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

And can you imagine the outcry if the British government sent someone to Portugal to get the so called questions. They would be accused of trying to take over the investigation.
Portuguese police need to pull their finger out....they are the ones who are supposed to be investigating this case.

Salem
02-09-2008, 11:01 AM
Gord - I'm shortening your post in my response for space reasons and highlighting the items I am responding too. Hope you don't mind.Thought fox

Firstly in the UK there is a clear distinction between the goverment and the law - this has grown up over many hundreds of years so that the legal system in this land can operate without any bias from whatever party or goverment is in rule at the time . I believe that the US has not a disimillar point of view . It is all about keeping our elected officials within the law - after all they are only elected officials - not above the law in any way -

The situation changed as soon as the Portugese Police made the Mccanns suspects or arguidos - the goverment has to step back and let the legal process of both countries take place. The law is what needs to take over . do you honestly think that the British Goverment at senior level - ie PM and foreign secretary ( Milliband ) are going to get themselves involved in a legal battle in anything so drastic as a child murder case. Do we really think that Gerry is so connected that he can get the goverment to pull strings . Come onthis is the Gerry Mccann that gets mocked daily here and in the news - he is a just who he is - a doctor

but please this case has nothing to do with the British goverment - it is a very sad case where a youg girl has dissapeared .

In a democratic country - as we have in the UK and we have in Portugal - then the legal system decides - not politicians - it is police and judges .

( IMHO )

It is true that Britian and the US have a very similar legal system. Because of that, I think it is naive to believe that the British govern't has not had a "position" in this case. I do not believe there is a "clear" distinction between the government and the law - at least not before the case gets to court. Government are well known for interferring with all kinds of criminal and civil cases that they should have no part in. And getting them out of the way does not generally happen before the case gets to the highest court. It is quite apparent that the McCanns have connections with the British government and, in particular, Mr. Brown. To think that Mr. Brown has no "weight" in this investigation is just plain wrong, in my opinion. His hands are all over it. And as prime minister, I have no doubt that he at least some power to interfere and muck up the investigation, if he wants to.

You are correct in that the Government does need to step back and let the law takeover. Many of us are waiting to see that happen and we hope it is soon.

You say Gerry is just a "doctor." However, I would propose that "doctors" are somewhat like royalty in your Country. Every article every written about the McCanns has reminded us that they are "doctors." This comment is generally written in such a way that it leads one to think that the McCanns could not have committed a crime because they are "doctors." Rather than excusing their behavior, I think the fact that they are doctors makes them even more likely to be involved in Maddie's disappearance, not less, because they have more to lose and it would tarnish there "royal doctorness."

It does appear that current news is being leaked in order to prepare the general public for the shelving of this case. I will be very disappointed if that happens. Even if the parents are not guilty of Maddie's demise, it is my opinion that they are not telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth and therefore they are guilty of impeding the investigation and, if in fact, Maddie was taken, then the McCanns are not only guilty of leaving Maddie alone, they are guilty of impeding the efforts of law enforcement to find her.

My opinion only, but I sincerely believe the British government has had a heavy hand in the progress of this investigation.

Salem

Texana
02-09-2008, 09:37 PM
You say Gerry is just a "doctor." However, I would propose that "doctors" are somewhat like royalty in your Country. Every article every written about the McCanns has reminded us that they are "doctors." This comment is generally written in such a way that it leads one to think that the McCanns could not have committed a crime because they are "doctors." Rather than excusing their behavior, I think the fact that they are doctors makes them even more likely to be involved in Maddie's disappearance, not less, because they have more to lose and it would tarnish there "royal doctorness."

It does appear that current news is being leaked in order to prepare the general public for the shelving of this case. I will be very disappointed if that happens. Even if the parents are not guilty of Maddie's demise, it is my opinion that they are not telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth and therefore they are guilty of impeding the investigation and, if in fact, Maddie was taken, then the McCanns are not only guilty of leaving Maddie alone, they are guilty of impeding the efforts of law enforcement to find her.

My opinion only, but I sincerely believe the British government has had a heavy hand in the progress of this investigation.

Salem

Really good points, Salem. Well said.

Tony Bennett
02-10-2008, 03:39 AM
I refer to Post No. 222 on this thread by colomon.

I have been aware of Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community for some time and have today decided to register.

My keen interest in the 'disappearance' of Madeleine McCann dates really from the very early days, when it just seemed something was not quite right, but more particularly from late August, when many stories began to suggest that the McCanns were involved in some way.

I don't intend to say anythig about myself here, save to say that my interest in the subject can be traced on the Anorak Forum where I have been an active contributor for 5 months. I prefer to debate and discuss in my own name.

I am happy to answer any questions about The Madeleine Foundation, why it was formed, and what we have been doing and intend to do, either publicly on this forum, or by pm, so long as the Moderators are content

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

april4sky
02-10-2008, 05:10 AM
McCanns to be cleared as no evidence found

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/09/wmaddy109.xml

Kate and Gerry McCann are to be cleared as official suspects in their daughter Madeleine’s disappearance after a review concluded there is no evidence they were involved, it has emerged.
The couple’s status as arguidos will be lifted unless “screaming contradictions” are revealed in forthcoming police interviews, according to a Portuguese newspaper.

***************
From the press so may or may not be true.

The longer this case has gone on and with accusations against the McCanns becoming ever more outragious the less I have believed they were involved.

Sadly I don't believe the PLE are, or were ever up to the job.

colomom
02-10-2008, 10:05 AM
I refer to Post No. 222 on this thread by colomon.

I have been aware of Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community for some time and have today decided to register.

My keen interest in the 'disappearance' of Madeleine McCann dates really from the very early days, when it just seemed something was not quite right, but more particularly from late August, when many stories began to suggest that the McCanns were involved in some way.

I don't intend to say anythig about myself here, save to say that my interest in the subject can be traced on the Anorak Forum where I have been an active contributor for 5 months. I prefer to debate and discuss in my own name.

I am happy to answer any questions about The Madeleine Foundation, why it was formed, and what we have been doing and intend to do, either publicly on this forum, or by pm, so long as the Moderators are content

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

Welcome aboard Mr. Bennett!

I am looking forward to your contribution. I have a favor, please.

Would you be able to point us to your website (if you have one) or perhaps you could tell us more (just a little bit) about your background. I believe that you are an attorney. Is that accurate? Please tell us a bit about your plans for the immediate future regarding finding justice for our girl who seems to have been forgotten as of late. Thank you in advance.

iNTERESTEDWOMAN
02-10-2008, 10:06 AM
McCanns to be cleared as no evidence found

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/09/wmaddy109.xml

Kate and Gerry McCann are to be cleared as official suspects in their daughter Madeleine’s disappearance after a review concluded there is no evidence they were involved, it has emerged.
The couple’s status as arguidos will be lifted unless “screaming contradictions” are revealed in forthcoming police interviews, according to a Portuguese newspaper.

***************
From the press so may or may not be true.

The longer this case has gone on and with accusations against the McCanns becoming ever more outragious the less I have believed they were involved.

Sadly I don't believe the PLE are, or were ever up to the job.

You know April, as much as I hate to admit it I do agree with you on the outrageous accusations part. I know I have made a few, and I'm not totally convinced of their innocence yet, BUT...after reading a few other less moderated forums I have to say I might be moving back to the fence.

I am totally hated, and called a "pro" :eek: on the 3 Arguidos forum, because I have been challenging the masses about the numerous pictures released by the McCanns. There are people who believe EVERY picture has been photo-shopped because one person says it so. Then the followers of each claim all agree, without a shred of evidence. When I take similar pictures and post them to prove the shadows are consistent, or the reflections accurate they'll say I'm hateful and challenge me.

My point is, I now can see how easily the McCann rumors are started, and how easily some people RUN with it and can take a totally innocent situation, and convert it into a huge conspiracy theory. It is so sad, really.

colomom
02-10-2008, 10:13 AM
The "radical" forums (either "pro" or "anti") are distressing to me IW. I will look at the 3A's just to see if there is any "breaking news". The same way I used to check the Mirror board. I rarely post because I too, see the gang mentality. I much prefer the civil tone of this board or especially, the Proboards site.

Stick to your guns, IW. No matter what you believe, every one deserves to be heard and treated with the same respect that they themselves exhibit.

Your last sentence just illustrates how the lack of information released by the PJ has made this case into the circus that it has become at times. It is my main aggravation as well.

Justice for Madeleine!!

april4sky
02-10-2008, 10:46 AM
You know April, as much as I hate to admit it I do agree with you on the outrageous accusations part. I know I have made a few, and I'm not totally convinced of their innocence yet, BUT...after reading a few other less moderated forums I have to say I might be moving back to the fence.

I am totally hated, and called a "pro" :eek: on the 3 Arguidos forum, because I have been challenging the masses about the numerous pictures released by the McCanns. There are people who believe EVERY picture has been photo-shopped because one person says it so. Then the followers of each claim all agree, without a shred of evidence. When I take similar pictures and post them to prove the shadows are consistent, or the reflections accurate they'll say I'm hateful and challenge me.

My point is, I now can see how easily the McCann rumors are started, and how easily some people RUN with it and can take a totally innocent situation, and convert it into a huge conspiracy theory. It is so sad, really.iNTERESTEDWOMAN thankyou. I think this is a great post especially after our previous exchanges. I apologise for my part.

Whats been happening is sad but you have just restored my faith.

And your last sentence explains whats happened perfectly.

I'm so glad I didn't put you on ignore. :blowkiss:

Salem
02-10-2008, 12:29 PM
Thank you Texana.

And IW your statement "I am totally hated, and called a "pro" :eek: on the 3 Arguidos forum" made me laugh - you a "pro" McCann. I just say that based on our exchanges here. Please know that I totally support your position and your privilege to review all the information and come to different conclusions from time to time.

I still believe in their guilt - but that does not mean that I don't bounce back and forth from time to time. There are just certain things I can not reconcile in this case. They make no sense to me, one of the biggest ones is that so many people appear to be involved and no one is talking. I have a hard time believing that not 1 of 9 people would tell the truth. This just seems to be incredibly high odds, 9 out of 9 people who have no conscious???:waitasec:

Salem

PS - Welcome Mr. Bennett!

Barnaby
02-10-2008, 08:25 PM
Welcome Mr Bennet, very interested to hear what you have to contribute.

colomom
02-11-2008, 01:03 PM
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3327947.ece

Very interesting article on Metodo 3

ThoughtFox
02-11-2008, 02:10 PM
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3327947.ece

Very interesting article on Metodo 3
Thanks, colomom - that's a good read. They certainly are slippery with the facts, and none of their claims are confirmed. Even the story that they tracked down a notorious criminal ends with the fact that he was never caught although they "tracked" him to Paris. But where's the proof of that?

My favorite quotes:

"It is not clear whether this is where the hotlines for any information about Madeleine are answered. Opposite the boardroom is an open-plan area of around half a dozen cubicles, equipped with banks of phones and computers. Most are empty when I arrive; admittedly it is lunch time. But I cannot ask about this. "

~~~

". . . after talking to Marco for half an hour, I conclude that what motivates him – as much as, if not more than, his professed desire to present Madeleine with the doll he boasts he carries around in his briefcase to hand to her when he finds her – is a sense of self-regard, self-publicity and money."

~~~

". . . when I ask him to elaborate on the 23 missing children his mother is reported to have said the agency has located in the past, Marco eases himself away from the table for the first time, tilting far back in his chair. He cannot talk about that on the grounds of confidentiality, he says. Shortly after this, his cousin Jose Luis, who has sat mostly silent until now, calls time on the interview with a chopping motion of his hand."

~~~

"None (of the other Barcelona detectives) believe M-3’s claims that it has 40 people working on the hunt for Madeleine, since the maximum number M-3 employs in its Barcelona office, they believe, is a dozen, with another few in its Madrid branch.

But again, I point out, it could have any number of operatives working for it in other countries, namely Portugal and Morocco. My comment draws a weary smile. Metodo 3 company records for the six years up to 2005 appear to show a decline in the number of permanent employees listed – from 26 in 1999to just 12 in 2005."

april4sky
02-13-2008, 04:51 AM
Madeleine's Face In Thousands Of Stamps

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1304957,00.html

A retired art teacher is trying to help the search for Madeleine McCann by creating a picture of the missing four-year-old using postage stamps.

Shazza
02-13-2008, 05:26 AM
Madeleine's Face In Thousands Of Stamps

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1304957,00.html

A retired art teacher is trying to help the search for Madeleine McCann by creating a picture of the missing four-year-old using postage stamps.

A great idea to keep Madelaines face out there and all over the world.

april4sky
02-13-2008, 05:39 AM
A great idea to keep Madelaines face out there and all over the world.Hi Shazza

It's very clever. And anything that keeps Madeleines face out there can only help.

april4sky
02-13-2008, 09:56 AM
Madeleine Cops Set To 'Shut The Case'

http://news.sky.com/skynews/madeleine

The police probe into the disappearance of British four-year-old Madeleine McCann is nearing its end, Portugal's justice minister has revealed.
***********
:waitasec: The search for Madeleine?

Seeker
02-13-2008, 03:48 PM
Police too hasty in making McCanns suspects (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080203/wl_uk_afp/portugalbritainmissing_080203153903;_ylt=AgyqQhyiM zskPGrl.g9eRqxbbBAF): Portuguese chief

LISBON (AFP) - Portuguese police admitted Sunday they had been hasty in making the parents of missing toddler Madeleine McCann official suspects in the case.

Alipio Ribeiro, national director of the Policia Judiciaria, told Radio Renascenca and the Publico newspaper there was "certain hastiness" in making Gerry and Kate McCann "arguidos", or formal suspects.



So the McCanns were there from May-September? 4 months they stayed there after their daughter was taken? If they were guilty IMO they would have hi-tailed it out of there as quickly as possible not stayed around for 4 months afterwards.

Shazza
02-13-2008, 03:55 PM
Maddie case to finish soon.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=295152


Hello April long time no talk.:blowkiss:

txsvicki
02-13-2008, 07:43 PM
I'm occasionally reading things here that I haven't seen discussed much. Quite a few posts back, and maybe on a different thread someone said that Madeline's spinal fluid was found in the vehicle. Was there any talk of this and how they knew it was spinal fluid? I'm just wondering how spinal fluid would be there unless it was a head injury?

colomom
02-13-2008, 08:09 PM
in Sol online:

http://sol.sapo.pt/PaginaInicial/Sociedade/Interior.aspx?content_id=80243&dossier=Madeleine

Copied from: http://helpmadeleine.proboards79.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1202919716 post #9

Madeleine case
Justice Minister considers it's "premature" to speak of the failure of the investigation

The Justice Minister, Alberto Costa, considered today it was "premature" to announce the failure of the investigation into the Madeleine case and defended that the development of the process should be awaited "without noise"

"We should await the development of the process without noise and we should not be premature in marking the outcome of the process", Alberto Costa said during the First Parliamentary Comission about the controversial statements that were made by the national director of the Policia Judiciaria (PJ) concerning the case of the English child that disppeared in the Algarve in May 2007.

The national director of the PJ, Alipio Ribeiro, stated, during an interview, that there may have been precipitation in the constitution of Kate and Gerry McCann, the child's parents, into arguidos.

When questioned by Nuno Melo, an MP from CDS/PP, about the truthfulness of Alipio Ribeiro's statements, the minister was peremptory: "I don't know, I don't want to know, and I cannot know whether they are false or true".

In another phase of the audition, which had been requested by CDS/PP, Alberto Costa remembered that "as a member of government, he never publicly comments on statements from persons who depend from him".

Earlier, the minister had guaranteed to the MP's in the Parliamentary Comission for Constitutional Matters that the comment from the PJ's top official had not affected "the superior course of the process" and that he has no indication that there may have been a "violation of the judicial secrecy".

Aguiar Branco, an MP from PSD, criticised that the Minister of Justice and communist MP Antonio Filipe - who dismissed the initiative from CDS/PP as "noise" - had diminished the value of Alipio Ribeiro's statements.

"We are playing with fire. There is an ongoing dismissal of the statements that are made by judicial agents within this Commission", the former Justice Minister said, also referring to the parliamentary audition of the Public Prosecutor, Pinto Ribeiro, about his statements concerning phone tapping.

Like Helena Pinto, from Bloco de Esquerda, Aguiar Branco considered that the minister only gave "procedural justifications".

"This is not a technical issue. The problem is one of political management of the situation", Aguiar Branco said, questioning whether the minister considered that Alipio Ribeiro's words were "innocuous".

The social-democrat MP insisted that this is "a problem of institutional trust", and that it was necessary to "draw political consequences from the statements".

Nuno Melo also criticised the alleged attempt to dismiss Alipio Ribeiro's statements, mentioning that those "had consequences on the credibility of Justice" and "external and internal" repercussions on the image of criminal investigation and of the country itself.