Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 179
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,476
    yes, Tony Bennett and his cronies published a lot of information on the web that was untrue. The Mccanns are not the first people he has targeted in this way. he has been threatened with prison in the Uk for this behaviour. One of the problems was certain people would go onto forums using multiple profiles and post their material as factual. They get stopped each time they get caught, but it is difficult to look at every website. I really do not think you can count statements put up on random websites as in any way factual. A lot of the websites out there have libelous material up, and cannot prove a word of what they say. Look at the BBC for the most accurate information. The McCannfiles' website is not in anyway a reliable or official website, and it is not a good idea to use it as proof. Anyone can put anything up on the web, and then go onto a forum and use the website as evidence.
    I have not seen any of the English statements that contradict the McCanns.
    And rashamon's two statements do not contradict each other either. Both say she noticed the door open, and the shutters open. The second is just a much more compact, less narrative version.

    Rashamon, are you accusing the Mccanns of lying, do you have any actual proof of this apart from things put up on random websites anonymously?


  2. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,649
    Quote Originally Posted by brit1981 View Post
    Rashamon, are you accusing the Mccanns of lying, do you have any actual proof of this apart from things put up on random websites anonymously?
    I have done some comparisons between a crucial section in Kate's book and witness statements of May 4/2007 as listed in the PJ case files.

    It goes without saying that witness statements are not necessarily accounts of the truth.

    But as I have I have pointed out before, the various witness statements are listed in the section "PJ files" (which have been released to the public).
    So these files are not something that has been 'concocted' by random websites. They are official case documents.
    Last edited by rashomon; 06-15-2012 at 06:10 PM.


  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rashomon For This Useful Post:


  4. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,649
    Quote Originally Posted by brit1981 View Post
    Look at the BBC for the most accurate information.
    Do you know or others know whether the BBC provides the link to the PJ case files as well?


  5. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,476
    Rashmon,
    Well nothing you have put here contradicts the McCanns. The statement from the PJ files is just a less narrative version. And you are looking at random websites claiming that the things on there are 100% accurate and from the PJ files. Like others have said some of these have been badly translated (using internet programmes soemtimes), and many of the sites people on here refer to are just random blogspots set up by people to support their own theories, and then used by the same people as proof when they comment on forums. I actually know someone who does this - she sets up blogspots about the McCanns, then goes onto various forums using different identities and claims the blogspots are evidence without mentioning she is the one who set them up. It is quite pathetic, especially as she will tell anyone who listens that she is "heavily involved with the Madeleine McCann case"! She is going to get into trouble with the police at some point (in the UK libel is a criminal as well as civil matter).

    And are you claiming the McCanns or their friends are lying, and if so what is your proof they are lying?

    The PJ files do not have their own official webiste, they were just given out to journalists and other interested parties. The BBC therefore doe snot lin to them, but does discuss them. I also think the telegraph, guardian, and independent give quite clear accounts too.


  6. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,649
    Quote Originally Posted by brit1981 View Post
    And are you claiming the McCanns or their friends are lying, and if so what is your proof they are lying?
    I only use the term 'proof' if I'm able to provide it. For example, if I say "In her book Kate states this and that", I can meet the burden of proof since I have the book and can link to the respective page.
    One can also prove what the McCanns have stated in interviews by giving the links.

    As for the differing accounts in the various witness statements, how is one to say who was lying and who wasn't? Or how is one to say who was simply wrong in their recollection or who was not?

    One can interpret certain facts and speculate about issues, but interpretations and speculations are not the same as statements of fact. This goes for both sides of the fence.

    As opposed to the jumbled mess of conflcting statements and differing versions of events, truth is always consistent and contradiction-free.
    Last edited by rashomon; 06-16-2012 at 07:10 AM.


  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to rashomon For This Useful Post:


  8. #51
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,649
    In their June 19/2007 interview with the Irish broadcaster RTE, the McCanns were asked why it was important to for them to stay in Portugal:

    [3:12] Interviewer : "Why do you think it is important to stay here in Portugal"?

    Kate replies: "I mean, I feel closer to Madeleine here, which - I mean, I might be wrong, she might be closer to the UK than, than here, but [breathes in audibly] I do feel close to Madeleine here; we're also close to the investigation here. And, er, to be honest, I can't really think about gong home - to our home, without Madeleine."

    Gerry's reaction to Kate' using the phrase "closer to Madeleine":
    "hen Kate says it the first time, his eyes move to the right [3:19] in a way that conveyed "concentration on something of crucial relevance" to me.

    When Kate mentions "closer to Madeleine" for the second time, he abruptly turns his head toward her at a 90 degree angle and distorts his mouth.


  9. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to rashomon For This Useful Post:


  10. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,476
    Quote Originally Posted by rashomon View Post
    In their June 19/2007 interview with the Irish broadcaster RTE, the McCanns were asked why it was important to for them to stay in Portugal:

    [3:12] Interviewer : "Why do you think it is important to stay here in Portugal"?

    Kate replies: "I mean, I feel closer to Madeleine here, which - I mean, I might be wrong, she might be closer to the UK than, than here, but [breathes in audibly] I do feel close to Madeleine here; we're also close to the investigation here. And, er, to be honest, I can't really think about gong home - to our home, without Madeleine."

    Gerry's reaction to Kate' using the phrase "closer to Madeleine":
    "hen Kate says it the first time, his eyes move to the right [3:19] in a way that conveyed "concentration on something of crucial relevance" to me.

    When Kate mentions "closer to Madeleine" for the second time, he abruptly turns his head toward her at a 90 degree angle and distorts his mouth.
    Can you please clarify if you are trying to imply (and implying something is still libelous) that the McCanns were saying that they were staying in Portugal to be physically closer to madeleine's body? Are you trying to imply that saying you feel closer to someone near where you last saw them and, a husband turning his head to his wife when she is speaking means that they disposed of their child's body or knew what happened to her? Do you have any actual proof of what you are trying to imply, or are you claiming that turning your head towards someone when they are speaking is a sign of guilt?


  11. The Following User Says Thank You to brit1981 For This Useful Post:


  12. #53
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,476
    Quote Originally Posted by rashomon View Post
    I only use the term 'proof' if I'm able to provide it. For example, if I say "In her book Kate states this and that", I can meet the burden of proof since I have the book and can link to the respective page.
    One can also prove what the McCanns have stated in interviews by giving the links.

    As for the differing accounts in the various witness statements, how is one to say who was lying and who wasn't? Or how is one to say who was simply wrong in their recollection or who was not?

    One can interpret certain facts and speculate about issues, but interpretations and speculations are not the same as statements of fact. This goes for both sides of the fence.

    As opposed to the jumbled mess of conflcting statements and differing versions of events, truth is always consistent and contradiction-free.
    So you have no proof whatsoever that they are lying. Yes you can state that kate says x and y in her book, but you cannot claim this contradicts anything else she has said to an extent that it means she is lying when you present slightly different verisons i.e a narrative version vs a simplified police statement i.e I went in through an unlocked door, saw the bedroom door was open, and the shutter was open vs, i went into the flat, and noticed the bedroom door was not quite shut, so I went to close it and a gust of window blew the door towards me and I realised the window was open. It seems from every single post you make you are trying to imply that the McCanns are lying and somehow are involved in their child's disappearence.
    Last edited by Salem; 06-16-2012 at 11:17 AM. Reason: Everyone gets to have their own opinion.


  13. The Following User Says Thank You to brit1981 For This Useful Post:


  14. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    29,233
    Hi Guys - just want to remind everyone that this forum is NOT for attacking each other's opinions. EVERYONE is allowed to review the available material and come to their own conclusions/theories based on their OWN interpretation of the facts.

    If you disagree with their interpretation, that's fine. You may rebut the post by providing your own theory/conclusions on the available info that you find important. OR you may just move past the post, without responding at all.

    What you may not do - is tell the other poster they are wrong, breaking laws, etc. If this is the message/intent of your post, don't post it.

    Everyone is allowed to interpret the facts as they wish.

    Thanks,

    Salem


  15. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Salem For This Useful Post:


  16. #55
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,476
    rashoman,
    Can you be a bit clearer on what you are trying to imply - it comes across as if you want people to infer the McCanns know where Madeleine is, and the husband was leaning towards the wife when she said closer because he was thinking of physically closer. Is that correct, is that what you infered, and want people to infer from your above comment or have I got that wrong and you do not want people to think that's what you meant?


  17. The Following User Says Thank You to brit1981 For This Useful Post:


  18. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    245
    What is an innocent discrepancy, a glaring contradiction, or a lie, or bad memory. It is open to interpretation to a certain degree and no more IMO.
    Judge for yourself which of the above is this difference here. In this video Kate Mccann states and with gusto, that if Madeleine had not disappeared, her comment made to her parents on Thursday morning asking them why did they not come when she and her brother were crying, woukd never have crossed her mind again as it was just a passing insignificant remark.

    Sandra Felgueiras interviews McCanns dated May 02 2008
    Google this on youtube, if this link does not work.

    http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_u...?v=MV4Ck61Favg

    Why then did three of her female friends state in their English ( no excuse of mistranslations here ) rogatory interviews that Kate Mccann told them at dinner on the night of 3rd May before Madeleine was discovered missing that she was very worried about Madeleine's comments that morning and was worried about whether leaving the back patio doors open was a good or bad idea. Would it bebetter if she woke up to be able to go out and find them or not?

    Reference the rogatory interviews of Fiona Payne, Jane Tanner, Rachel Oldfield. You can search for them easily on mccannpjfiles.co.uk

    Rachel

    Reply “Yeah, yeah. I remember reading my book on the sofa for a while and then think I, I went to bed but it would have been quite, you know it would have been about nine, cos I’d been up most of the night before, erm and I mean I know that on Thursday night when we sat down at the table, Kate said that to Madeleine and Sean had you know, said they’d been crying on the Wednesday night and asking where erm, they’d said they’d been crying and, and some, you know, this is sort of with hindsight but I you know, I was trying to think whether I’d heard anything but”.
    1578 “On the Wednesday evening”.
    Reply “Mmm”.
    1578 “Who said they’d been crying sorry”?
    Reply “Kate did, when we sat down at the table on the Thursday night, Kate said that erm, Madeleine and Sean had cried, said they’d been crying, erm and you know wondered where she was, or wondered where you know, Mummy and Daddy were, erm I mean this was kind of after Madeleine disappeared, we talked, she mentioned that when we sat at the table on Thursday and then after Madeleine had disappeared, erm McCANN’s said, oh well I wonder whether on the Wednesday, you know somebody had tried to get in perhaps or had got in and they’d seen something, erm you know and I was next door in the apartment but I mean I didn’t hear any, well you know, I didn’t hear anything, I could well have been asleep, erm you could hear quite a lot through the apartments because G***e, she always wakes up early but because she seemed to have diarrhoea every night, she’d wake up sort of six o’clock most mornings and we’d always have to put her in the, in the shower or in the bath first thing, and Gerry and Kate would always hear that and so you know, most of the comments first thing in the morning would be like, oh so G***e was up early again, she’d be invariably screaming her head off, so”.
    1578 “On Wednesday evening”.
    Reply “Mmm”.

    Oh and Brit1981 how you can say there is a translation error in Gerry Mccanns statement saying he entered the apartment via the front door with his key because it was locked is beyond me. How can anyone translate that he entered the apartment via the back doors which were unlocked to THAT. This mistranslation escuse to cover discrepancies is getting a bit thin.

    Fiona Payne

    1485
    “But you said that Kate told you about Madeleine waking up?”


    Reply
    “Yeah”.


    1485
    “And you couldn’t remember, you didn’t, you weren’t sure whether it was the night before?”


    Reply
    “Yeah”.


    1485
    “Or, you know, the night before that?”


    Reply
    “Yeah”.


    1485
    “What were the circumstances regarding her telling you that?”


    Reply
    “She did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying ‘Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or’, erm, ‘or locking it and, you know, finding that we’re not there and the door’s locked if she woke up’, because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh”.

    01.15.57
    1485
    “So she asked you what your thoughts were regarding locking?”


    Reply
    “Yeah”.


    1485
    “Did she say whether she had locked or?”


    Reply
    “No, that was the point, I think they said they’d left it, well she’d said she’d left it unlocked”.


    1485
    “Left the patio?”


    Reply
    “And she felt a bit nervous about it but Gerry, Gerry had sort of said ‘Oh it will be fine’, you know. But she was obviously, because it wasn’t something she was quite easy with, that’s the way it came across, you know, but, but Gerry said, you know, ‘It’ll be fine. It’ll be fine’. Because I don’t imagine she would have said anything otherwise if it hadn’t been on her mind. And the fact was she, she, you know, commented on it being really strange that, that Madeleine had said this about waking up and them not being there and she’d mentioned that in the context of that conversation”.


    1485
    “And can you remember exactly what she said that Madeleine had said?”


    Reply
    “Tut, just words such as, erm, ‘Sean and I woke up and we were crying mummy and where were you’”.


    1485
    “Okay. Did she say what she said to Madeleine after that?”


    Reply
    “No, I think, it was more, the conversation was more Kate said she was trying to get more out of Madeleine, but as kids are, you know, they sort of move on and she wouldn’t really, she couldn’t really get out of her what had caused her to wake up or, or, erm, you know, whether she’d just woken up anyway and, you know, she never, never got that out of Madeleine”.

    01.17.29
    1485
    “And what did you say?”


    Reply
    “She didn’t seem frightened or anything, I mean, that is what Kate did say, you know, it wasn’t something that had frightened Madeleine. I said, in the context of the holiday, I guess I just said ‘Oh I’m sure they’ll be fine’”.


    1485
    “Right”.


    Reply
    “Much to my regret”.


    1485
    “Was that the early part of, I mean, because you have only got a window of about an hour really, haven’t you, in between, you know, you sitting down and Kate going and raising the alarm?”


    Reply
    “Yeah”.


    1485
    “So”.


    Reply
    “It was fairly early on in that evening”.


    1485
    “Fairly early?”


    Reply
    “Yeah, yeah”.


    1485
    “Could it have been the time that Gerry had gone to do the checking and then subsequently ran into Jez, could it have been around about that time?”


    Reply
    “I couldn’t say, I mean, you know, I’d say it was in the first half of the evening”.


    1485
    “Yeah. Is there anything else that you can remember about that conversation?”


    Reply
    “No, as I say, it just strikes me, in awful retrospect, that, you know, Kate, I think, had done something that she wasn’t quite happy with, in leaving the doors unlocked. And that is something again that she is going to beat herself up about for a long time to come because, you know, you, you like think that you acted on your instincts and I think her instinct was that that was something she wasn’t really happy to do”.

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

    oh an brit1981 how on earth can translations be blamed - how on earth can anyone mistranslate entering through the front door with a key cos it was locked to entering via the back door cos it was unlocked, wearing a bit thin here dont you think these excuses? the odd word might be mistranslated in nuance but not the whole gist, barrel scraping?
    Last edited by saggymoon; 06-18-2012 at 07:18 PM.


  19. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to saggymoon For This Useful Post:


  20. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    245
    in kates book she takes pains to assure the reader she had no safety concerns about the kids falling over a balcony or some such as they were on a ground floor flat and some of their other mates were on a first floor flat and their kids could fall over. well, the fact of the matter is that that 5a where they stayed despite being technically on the ground floor was actually a flat built on a hill which meant they did have a balcony and a sharp drop over said balcony, all 5a photos prove this, another deception brit1981


  21. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to saggymoon For This Useful Post:


  22. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    245
    brit1981 why did russell o brien in his interview state that he checked on matt oldfields children on sunday when matt oldfield was actually at home that evening sick and why did russell oldfield say he checked on the mccanns kids through the patio doors on the sunday when gerry mccann says they locked the patio doors that sunday, cant get their stories straight can they obviously


  23. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to saggymoon For This Useful Post:


  24. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    245
    brit1981 why does mathew oldfield state that kate and all her kids watched the mens tennis match at 6.30pm on thursday when kate says she was in their apartment at the time? you want discrepancies, you have tonnes to answer


  25. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to saggymoon For This Useful Post:


  26. #60
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,476
    saggy,
    Are you accusing Mathew Oldfield and the McCanns of lying? Where is the proof? Where are you getting your information -can you provide a link that proves they are lying if that is what you are accusing them of? If you are accusing them of lying, can you state why as it comes across as if you are accusing them of covering up something to do with madeleine's disappearence.

    Seriously you are saying that a ground floor balcony constitutes a sharp drop, and the Mccanns despite publishing pictures of the balcony are trying to hide that fact?

    Also why do I have tonnes to answer, I am not accusing anyone of being involved in a child's disappearence. If I had made accusations someone was somehow involved in a child's disappearence then I could understand you claiming I had a lot to answer as obviously I could be taken to court for libel (if the Mccanns were informed of the accusations and they felt their accusations were defamatory and untrue) and so would have to provide proof for their accusations and implications I had made. But as I have not accused anyone of being involved in a child's disappearence then I do not have a lot to answer.

    Rashoman,
    Can you clarify if you are accusing the McCanns of being involved in madeleine's disappearence as I am not sure if you realise that but it comes across as if you are accusing them of this.


  27. The Following User Says Thank You to brit1981 For This Useful Post:


Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Who was listening to the McCanns?
    By Isabella in forum Madeleine McCann
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-19-2009, 03:51 PM
  2. UK tabloids apologize to McCanns
    By hipmamajen in forum Madeleine McCann
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-04-2009, 03:47 AM
  3. Will the McCanns Willing Go to Portugal?
    By Salem in forum Madeleine McCann
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 07-20-2008, 02:44 PM
  4. Why do the McCanns care about us?
    By hcc2007 in forum Madeleine McCann
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 10-04-2007, 04:18 PM
  5. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-15-2007, 08:17 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •