Why Thursday Night?

Status
Not open for further replies.

CaliKid

Former Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2004
Messages
4,646
Reaction score
84
Something has been bugging me for awhile that I want to throw out for discussion. Please read through it and respond calmly without getting into each other's faces. It's only a question.

Imagine that Kate and Gerry McCann killed Madeleine. It was an accident due to one of several scenarios we've discussed, and the how really doesn't matter. Nor does the when- the injury/overdose/allergic reaction occurred before the McCanns went out to eat with their friends, and during those few hours they managed to conceal their emotions, hide or dispose of Madeleine's body and carry on with dinner?

Why on Thursday night?

What if Kate and Gerry had spent the entire evening with their friends and returned to their apartment and gone to bed? They could've staged it to look as if someone broke in at night and "stolen" Madeleine while they slept by leaving a door unlocked or a window shutter ajar. There would be no recriminating questions about leaving the children alone, how far away they were at the Tapas bar or whether one of their friends was involved.

So why didn't the McCanns make it easy on themselves by coming up with a better plan?
 
IT has been said that Thursday Night was Sex party night, the big event of the Holiday, if they said they could not make it then they all know somthing was wrong.
 
The only problem I have with this "sex night" theory is the couple who brought the mother. Seriously if that is what you had planned on doing would you bring your mum along.

Calikid I have often wondered that myself - why they didn't just say someone stole her while they were asleep - and the only reason I can come up with is that they had nothing to do with Madeleine disappearance. JMHO
 
Why on Thursday night?

What if Kate and Gerry had spent the entire evening with their friends and returned to their apartment and gone to bed? They could've staged it to look as if someone broke in at night and "stolen" Madeleine while they slept by leaving a door unlocked or a window shutter ajar. There would be no recriminating questions about leaving the children alone, how far away they were at the Tapas bar or whether one of their friends was involved.

So why didn't the McCanns make it easy on themselves by coming up with a better plan?
Wow, very interesting question. It is possible that one or both may have been seen, the Tapas alibi has served them well so far. -or-

There could also be the risk of the twins waking and sounding an alarm if they were not there. -or-

It has been speculated they had help from someone(s) and the Tapas movements again play into the alibi.

The above are just theories, I actually think that they are so narcisistic that while it was ok for them to leave the kids, they were not about to let the world think that right under their loving and protective noses someone was able to steal her away. They are interested in projecting -with their mega media campaingn- that they are much better parents than that.
 
I think if the McCann's are responsible for her death, their actions were like most people's actions when pressed to cover the truth by being caught in a horrible situation: they quickly came up with a plan that made sense AT the time. Not realizing, it wasn't exactly a good idea to put in motion. That is... if they are responsible for her death.
 
No Mass on Thursday, they knew the church would be empty to store her body...of course my theory is based on premeditated murder. Most Catholic Churches have Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday night mass, and then a Sunday morning mass.
 
I think if the McCann's are responsible for her death, their actions were like most people's actions when pressed to cover the truth by being caught in a horrible situation: they quickly came up with a plan that made sense AT the time. Not realizing, it wasn't exactly a good idea to put in motion. That is... if they are responsible for her death.

I agree Elphaba. I think it was a knee-jerk reaction, pure panic. I do not believe they had time to discuss it much or really think it through.
 
Elphaba said:
I think if the McCann's are responsible for her death, their actions were like most people's actions when pressed to cover the truth by being caught in a horrible situation: they quickly came up with a plan that made sense AT the time. Not realizing, it wasn't exactly a good idea to put in motion. That is... if they are responsible for her death.

I agree - I don't think it was premeditated, but I do think there was a cover-up about "something" or maybe more than one thing, and lies have been told.

I feel that even if there had been more time to set up alibis etc, the McCanns wouldn't have considered what they were doing with checking on the children as incorrect in any way. From every interview I've watched or read, they justified their actions and rationalized their own behavior as normal, understandable, and "safe." I don't think they ever dreamed anyone would question whether they were good parents or not, so they didn't bother to cover up the arrangements of checking on the kids.
 
Possible theories (just my thoughts...not sure if I agree with any of them).

Why did it happen the way it did that night?

1. Only one parent knew what happened. The other one wouldn't be able to leave Maddie there to be discovered dead by the other.

2. Maybe they did intend on taking care of it later but someone suggested doing something in the Mccanns room and they couldn't have that (not suggesting sex party but it's possible). The Mccanns wouldn't have a good reason why not I would think.
 
I agree also it was a hasty plan and quickly decided cover up, and they did not want to deviate as much as possible from the routine of previous nights.

It would be much more suspect that someone would take a child while her parents were sleeping nearby--rather than take her during the time they were actually gone from the accommodations.
 
Because just like the Ramseys, they are sociopathic narcissists who knew they could use their friends for an alibi. Users and manipulators, it made more sense to them to involve all their friends, and that way be able to project guilt (or at least dilute guilt) away from themselves, plus enjoy the power of having control over the lives of seven other people.

Thankfully some of the Tapas Seven are waking up, and asking themselves the question: "Is it worth risking the ire of the McCanns and their powerful junta to speak out and clear ourselves?"
 
They were on track to attend the party/dinner, it would have been strange if they had skipped.

If guilty, imagine people dropping by to say hello, etc.
 
Really like your name, Replicant. If some accident occurred & they followed Calikid's cover-up, it would have been simple to phone the friends and give their regrets for the evening. Any reason but unable to attend the final night's dinner. The defensive bravado about leaving the children being safe, especially w. regular checks, seems about as shallow as a shirtboard if the new information coming from the London based Portuguese att'y is accurate. He says the police were not phoned until the party got its story straight about leaving all the children unsupervised. That may not be true and even if it is, the lawyer should not have put that before the public. It is an admission against interest for his own client who should be allowed to speak for himself (or not). But the media probably misreported the story, as usual.
 
Because just like the Ramseys, they are sociopathic narcissists who knew they could use their friends for an alibi. Users and manipulators, it made more sense to them to involve all their friends, and that way be able to project guilt (or at least dilute guilt) away from themselves, plus enjoy the power of having control over the lives of seven other people.

Thankfully some of the Tapas Seven are waking up, and asking themselves the question: "Is it worth risking the ire of the McCanns and their powerful junta to speak out and clear ourselves?"
But are they really Pink? I sincerely hope they are but as Tuba said above not very wise or professional really of the solicitor to put the story in the public forum, so is it true at all?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
194
Guests online
2,255
Total visitors
2,449

Forum statistics

Threads
589,969
Messages
17,928,493
Members
228,026
Latest member
CSIFLGIRL46
Back
Top